Cases 71 - 80 of 100
Luis Cruz v. Attorney General United States
as 20-1421
Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Petitioner:
LUIS RAMOS CRUZ
Luis Ramos-Ballesteros v. William Barr
as 20-70410
Petitioner:
LUIS RAMOS-BALLESTEROS
Respondent:
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General
Rodriguez v. City of New York et al
as 1:2019cv11925
Defendant:
Luis Ramos, The City Of New York,, NYPD Detective John Slater, Shield # 6994 and others
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Resendez v. United States of America et al
as 1:2019cv00589
Defendant:
Luis Ramos, M K Lewis, Medical League Concepts Correct Solutions and others
Plaintiff:
Ramon Gonzalez Resendez
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
United States of America v. Ramos-Rodriguez et al
as 3:2019cv02073
Plaintiff:
United States of America (Farm Service Agency) and United States of America
Defendant:
Edith Mercedes Santiago Alfonso, Jorge Luis Ramos Rodriguez, Conjugal partnership Ramos Santiago and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2019cv01165
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Ramos et al v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.
as 1:2019cv01388
Defendant:
Smith & Nephew, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Molly Ramos and Luis Ramos
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith v. Cook County et al
as 1:2019cv03076
Plaintiff:
Donche Hall, Jamon Dantzler, William Baber and others
Defendant:
John Doe and Cook County
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ramos-Amparo v. USA
as 3:2019cv01186
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Luis Ramos-Amparo
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Bauzo-Vazquez, et al v. Hilton Worldwide, Inc., et al
as 19-1124
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RAFAEL RAMOS-MATOS, MARY ANN MATOS-CHAPMAN, ROSA BAUZO-VAZQUEZ and others
Defendant:
CHRISTIAN OLEAS
Defendant / Appellee:
HILTON WORLDWIDE, INC. and EL CONQUISTADOR PARTNERSHIP, L.P., S.E.
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.
