Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv04209
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 ed Removal - Employment Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2026cv01162
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Wisconsin Log Homes Inc v. Hummel et al
as 1:2026cv01121
Plaintiff:
Wisconsin Log Homes Inc
Defendant:
Hans Hummel, Hummel Hans Living Trust DTD and Ray Apodaca
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501 Copyright Infringement
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv04300
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Apodaca v. Cabezuela
as 4:2026cv00047
Plaintiff:
Jesus Apodaca
Defendant:
Roxann Cabezuela
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Henry et al v. American Economy Insurance Company
as 1:2026cv02562
Plaintiff:
Dale Henry and Tasia Apodaca
Defendant:
American Economy Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv03722
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Apodaca v. Apodaca et al
as 3:2026cv00251
Plaintiff:
Holly R Apodaca
Defendant:
James R Apodaca, The Apodaca Group Logistics, Inc and John Does
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Smith v. Fujiwara, et al.
as 26-3270
Plaintiff:
LARRY SMITH
Defendant:
N. FUJIWARA, Sergeant, N. ROMNEY, Correctional Officer, RALPH DIAZ, Secretary of CDCR and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv03560
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans with Disabilities Act
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.
