Cases 41 - 50 of 53
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv01212
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Vasquez v. Lovelock Correctional Center
as 2:2009cv00834
Plaintiff:
Rosendo Vasquez
Defendant:
Lovelock Correctional Center
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Vasquez
as 2:2009cv00833
Plaintiff:
Rosendo Vasquez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Vasquez v. North las Vegas Dentention Center
as 2:2009cv00424
Plaintiff:
Orlando Vasquez
Defendant:
North las Vegas Dentention Center
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Vasquez v. Detention Center North Las Vegas
as 2:2008cv01839
Plaintiff:
Orlando R. Vasquez
Defendant:
Detention Center North Las Vegas
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2008cv01639
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2008cv01640
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Trustees of the Operating Engineers Pension Trust et al v Advanced Demolition Technologies Inc et al
as 2:2008cv01217
Plaintiff:
Trustees of the Operating Engineers Pension Trust, Trustees of the Operating Engineers Health and Welfare Fund, Trustees of the Operating Engineers Journeyman and Apprentice Training Trust and others
Defendant:
Advanced Demolition Technologies, Inc. and Ruben Vasquez
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Geiger v. Erlach et al
as 2:2008cv01075
Plaintiff:
Dan S. Geiger
Defendant:
Michelle M Erlach, Robison, Belaustegui, Sharp & Low, Maupin, Cox, and LeGoy and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Vasquez v. Clark County Detention Center
as 2:2008cv01043
Plaintiff:
Hector Vasquez
Defendant:
Clark County Detention Center
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
