Cases 21 - 30 of 271
Rodriguez-Robles v. Warden, FCI Elkton
as 4:2023cv01285
Petitioner:
David Rodriguez-Robles
Respondent:
Warden, FCI Elkton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Thai v. Burns et al
as 4:2021cv01267
Defendant:
Keith A Feldman, John Vo, Dale G Spencer and others
Plaintiff:
An Thai
Cromartie v. Hale et al
as 2:2023cv01802
Plaintiff:
Alton Cromartie
Defendant:
Dr. Arthur Hale, Mary Roush, Ashley Orsbone and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Palmer v. Gradilla
as 1:2023cv00235
Petitioner:
Marcelino Segura Palmer
Respondent:
Gabriela Rodriguez Gradilla
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00668
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Varela Rivera et al v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv01520
Plaintiff:
Carmen R. Varela Rivera and Angel Rodriguez
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Lollis et al v. Cenovus Energy Inc. et al
as 3:2023cv00252
Plaintiff:
Levi Lollis Jr., David Cook and Rolando Rodriguez
Defendant:
Cenovus Energy Inc., John Does and Lima Refining Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Perez-Rodriguez v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv00326
Plaintiff:
Juan Perez-Rodriguez
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Rodriguez v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2022cv04226
Plaintiff:
Hector Rodriguez
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
McCoy v. Heavenly Circle LLC, et al
as 1:2022cv01930
Plaintiff:
Stephanie McCoy
Defendant:
Heavenly Circle LLC doing business as Heavenly Circle Home Care, LLC, Marilyn Vicente and Elba Rodriguez
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 704 Labor Litigation
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.
