Cases 51 - 60 of 73
ETrade Bank v. Jimenez
as 1:2010cv02663
Plaintiff:
ETrade Bank
Defendant:
Carlos Jimenez
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Jimenez v. McNeil
as 1:2010cv22180
Plaintiff:
Carlos Jimenez
Defendant:
Walter A. McNeil
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv03289
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Jimenez v. Noll
as 3:2010cv01473
Petitioner:
Carlos Jimenez
Respondent:
C. Noll
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Glassman v. The City of New York et al
as 1:2010cv02468
Plaintiff:
Donald Glassman
Defendant:
The City of New York , The New York City Police Department, Ismael Villalba and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jimenez v. The City of New York et al
as 1:2010cv01008
Plaintiff:
Carlos Jimenez
Defendant:
P.O. Jane Doe, P.O. John Doe, P.O.A. Jalil and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
William Pittman v. Metuchen Police Department, et al
as 09-4253
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM PITTMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
METUCHEN POLICE DEPARTMENT, BOROUGH OF METUCHEN, ROBIN RENTENBERG and others
Mora v. Nice Transportation Service, Inc et al
as 1:2009cv22954
Plaintiff:
Hernan Mora
Defendant:
Nice Transportation Service, Inc and Carlos Jimenez
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0206 Collect Unpaid Wages
J & J Sports Production Inc v. Carlos Jimenez et al
as 5:2009cv01729
Plaintiff:
J & J Sports Production Inc
Defendant:
Carlos Jimenez and Martha Jimenez
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 521 Violations of Cable Communications Act of 1984
USA v. Juan Osorio-Funez
as 09-10297
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
JUAN ANGEL OSORIO-FUNEZ, AKA Alelardo Trejo, AKA Gonzalo Andrade, AKA Emilio Andrate, AKA Asento Gonzalez, AKA Osorio Danilo Fernandez, AKA Julio Mejia, AKA Juan Angel Funez, AKA Marcial Cariyo, AKA Carlos Jimenez, AKA Abeljardo Trejo, AKA Juan Funez, AKA
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.
