Cases 61 - 70 of 100
Vazquez v. Tomorrow Energy Corp. et al
as 2:2024cv00698
Plaintiff:
Michael Vazquez
Defendant:
Tomorrow Energy Corp., TI Sales Group, LLC, Paul Keene and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Urve Maggitti v. Bret Binder, et al
as 24-1169
Plaintiff:
URVE MAGGITTI
Defendant:
BRET M. BINDER, DEBRA RYAN, DANIEL E. ROLAND and others
Harpo-Brown v. FNU et al
as 5:2024cv00041
Plaintiff:
Wihly Harpo-Brown
Defendant:
Gunther FNU, John Doe, Jane Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mathieu, Marcelyn v. Florida Department of Corrections
as 1:2024cv20263
Plaintiff:
Marcelyn Mathieu
Defendant:
Florida Department of Corrections
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv00056
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Mathieu v. McKesson Corporation et al.
as 1:2024op45002
Plaintiff:
Darlene Mathieu
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation, Cardinal Health, Inc., AmerisourceBergen Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Urve Maggitti v. Bret Binder, et al
as 23-3276
Plaintiff:
URVE MAGGITTI
Defendant:
HONORABLE BRET M. BINDER, In his Official Capacity as Judge, BENJAMIN D. KOHLER, Esq., Esq., in his Official Capacity as Deputy Prothonotary, ANTHONY T. VERWEY, In his Official Capacity as Judge and others
Urve Maggitti v. William Mahon, et al
as 23-3275
Plaintiff:
URVE MAGGITTI
Defendant:
WILLIAM P. MAHON, JOHN HALL, DEBRA TODD and others
Urve Maggitti v. Bret Binder, et al
as 23-3277
Plaintiff:
URVE MAGGITTI
Defendant:
BRET M. BINDER, DEBRA RYAN, DANIEL E. ROLAND and others
Aspel v. Incode Technologies, Inc.
as 1:2023cv17093
Plaintiff:
Mathieu Aspel
Defendant:
Incode Technologies, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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.
