Cases 21 - 30 of 198
Santos v. Agave & Rye Limited Liability Company
as 3:2023cv00969
Plaintiff:
Brittney Santos
Defendant:
Agave & Rye Limited Liability Company
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00722
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Deshawn Anderson-Santos v. Kent County, MI, et al
as 23-1259
Plaintiff / Appellee:
DESHAWN ANDERSON-SANTOS
Defendant:
KENT COUNTY, MI
Defendant / Appellant:
DEREK LESHAN, in his individual and official capacity
Adolfo Gomez-Santos v. Merrick Garland
as 23-3206
Petitioner:
ADOLFO GOMEZ-SANTOS
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. Attorney General
Santos-Perez v. USA
as 5:2023cv00059
Petitioner:
Luis Angel Santos-Perez
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Williane Rodrigues Dos Santos Argueta v. Omar Argueta-Ugalde
as 23-1107
Petitioner:
WILLIANE RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS ARGUETA
Respondent:
OMAR ARGUETA-UGALDE
RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS ARGUETA, v. ARGUETA-UGALDE
as 2:2022cv12840
Plaintiff:
WILLIANE RODRIGUES DOS SANTOS ARGUETA,
Defendant:
OMAR ARGUETA-UGALDE
Detroit v. Commerce et al
as 3:2022cv12205
Plaintiff:
City of Detroit
Defendant:
United States Department of Commerce, United States Census Bureau, Gina M Raimondo and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Mitchell et al v. Benton Harbor, City of et al
as 1:2022cv00475
Plaintiff:
Iesha Mitchell, Kea N. Bennett, Christine Anderson and others
Defendant:
Benton Harbor, City of, Marcus Muhammad, Michael O'Malley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Other Civil Rights
Santos v. Lane et al
as 3:2022cv00231
Plaintiff:
Fesnando F. Santos
Defendant:
Lieutenant f/n/u Lane and Sergeant f/n/u Coon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
