Cases 1 - 10 of 45
Perez v. Quiros et al
as 3:2024cv00651
Plaintiff:
Ometrius Perez
Defendant:
Angel Quiros, Connecticut Department of Correction, Colleen Gallager and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Mitchell v. Martin
as 3:2023cv00902
Plaintiff:
James Mitchell
Defendant:
Robert Martin, Rachel Fontaine, Wright and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gray v. Connecticut Department of Children and Families et al
as 3:2023cv00447
Plaintiff:
Bennie Gray, Jr
Defendant:
Connecticut Department of Children and Families, Joseph Wnuk, Elizabeth Calderon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Calderon v. U.S. Department of State et al
as 3:2022cv01015
Plaintiff:
Jason Calderon
Defendant:
U.S. Department of State, City of Douglas and State of Arizona
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Calderon v. USA
as 3:2021cv00724
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Pablo Calderon
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Germano v. Cook et al
as 3:2021cv00550
Defendant:
Cook, John Doe, Borges and others
Plaintiff:
Paul Germano
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Baltas v. Jones et al
as 3:2021cv00469
Plaintiff:
Joe Baltas
Defendant:
Kim Jones, David Maiga, Michael Calderon and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rooks v. Santiago et al
as 3:2020cv00299
Defendant:
McNeil, A. Hannah, Snowden and others
Plaintiff:
Marcus Rooks
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Harnage v. Cook et al
as 3:2020cv00053
Defendant:
Lugo, John Day, Peaches Hall and others
Plaintiff:
James A. Harnage
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Innovative Sports Management, Inc. v. Bonilla-Calderon et al
as 3:2019cv01712
Defendant:
Ceviche Palace LLC and Christian E Bonilla-Calderon
Plaintiff:
Innovative Sports Management, Inc. and Innovative Sports Management, Inc. doing business as Integrated Sports Media
Cause Of Action: 17 U.S.C. § 501
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.
