Cases 71 - 80 of 1,377
Patel, et al v. 7-Eleven, Inc.
as 23-1043
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DHANANJAY PATEL, SAFDAR HUSSAIN, VATSAL CHOKSHI and others
Defendant / Appellee:
7-ELEVEN, INC.
Defendant:
MARY CADIGAN and ANDREW BROTHERS
3Rd Party Defendant:
DP MILK STREET INC., DP JERSEY INC., DP TREMONT STREET INC. and others
Baez v. Harvard Maintenance, Inc.
as 1:2022cv12199
Plaintiff:
Christian Baez
Defendant:
Harvard Maintenance, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Ruiz-Romero v. Stelaris Food 369, Inc.
as 22-1973
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ERNESTO RUIZ-ROMERO
Defendant / Appellee:
STELARIS FOOD 369, INC.
Lynch v. Enlighten Software Inc.
as 1:2022cv11997
Plaintiff:
Kevin Patrick Lynch
Defendant:
Enlighten Software Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Flaherty v. Park Plus, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv11909
Plaintiff:
Patrick J. Flaherty
Defendant:
Park Plus, Inc., Ron Astrup and Paul Bates
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Ferrer-Melendez v. Departamento de Salud de Puerto Rico et al
as 3:2022cv01520
Plaintiff:
Sonia Ivette Ferrer-Melendez
Defendant:
Departamento de Salud de Puerto Rico and Departamento de Justicia de Puerto Rico
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv11827
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Maytas v. Cabinets To Go, LLC et al
as 1:2022cv11545
Plaintiff:
Margaret Maytas
Defendant:
Cabinets To Go, LLC, Thomas Sullivan and Christopher Lambert
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Ortiz-Colon et al v. El Legado Golf Resort et al
as 3:2022cv01400
Plaintiff:
Michelle Ortiz-Colon, WJL-O and ZML-O
Defendant:
El Legado Golf Resort, Gerardo Lopez-Moret, Marisol Colon and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
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.
