Cases 31 - 40 of 100
Matos v. AFAM Concept Inc. et al
as 1:2026cv06863
Plaintiff:
Tamarra Matos
Defendant:
AFAM Concept Inc., Avlon Industries Inc., BEAUTY BELL ENTERPRISES LLC FKA HOUSE OF CHEATHAM INC and others
:
Service List
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
DE MATOS CURADO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
as 3:2026cv06854
Plaintiff:
VALDEMAR J. DE MATOS CURADO
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01925
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv03355
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv01481
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
LEE v. SCHMELZLE et al
as 3:2026cv03922
Plaintiff:
ROBERT SINCLAIR LEE
Defendant:
M SCHMELZLE, J CARR, P BLUM and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Matos v. City of Lowell et al
as 1:2026cv12321
Plaintiff:
Irma Matos
Defendant:
City of Lowell, The Lowell Police Department and The Lowell District Court
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Clervrain v. Raimondo, et al
as 26-1593
Plaintiff:
MANETIRONY CLERVRAIN and FRIDELYNE MAISONEUVE
Defendant:
JACK REED, DAVID N. CICILLINE, JAMES LANGEVIN and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv01672
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv01190
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
