Cases 1 - 10 of 611
San Luis Obispo County Homeless Union, et al. v. County of San Luis Obispo, et al.
as 24-2575
Plaintiff:
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY HOMELESS UNION, a local affiliate of the California Homeless Union, on behalf of itself, its members and current and former residents of Oklahoma Parking Site, DAVID RICHFORD, DAN RICHFORD and others
Defendant:
COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES DIVISION, DEVIN DRAKE, in his official capacity as Director of Social Services and others
Laura Baldwin v. Joshua Devine, et al
as 24-1510
Plaintiff:
Laura Marie Baldwin
Defendant:
Joshua C. Devine, Individually, doing business as Circuit Judge, Callaway County 13th Circuit Court, Kevin M.J. Crane, Individually, doing business as Circuit Judge and others
Institute of Devine Metaphysical Research v. Kinley-Davis
as 2:2024mc50209
Plaintiff:
Institute of Devine Metaphysical Research
Defendant:
Carla Kinley-Davis
Respondent:
Mikai Green, Esq.
Cushman & Wakefield U.S., Inc. v. Saclarides et al
as 1:2024cv00913
Plaintiff:
Cushman & Wakefield U.S., Inc.
Defendant:
Michael Saclarides and Devin Bryan
Glazing Employers and Glaziers Union Local #27 Pension and Retirement Fund v. iRhythm Technologies, Inc. et al
as 3:2024cv00706
Plaintiff:
Glazing Employers and Glaziers Union Local #27 Pension and Retirement Fund
Defendant:
iRhythm Technologies, Inc., Quentin Blackford, Brice Bobzien and others
Holcomb v. Nissan North America, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv00039
Plaintiff:
Dean Alton Holcomb
Defendant:
Nissan North America, Inc., Nissan of Hendersonville, LLC., Dawud Talib Muhammad and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Devin Wade v. California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
as 5:2024cv00304
Plaintiff:
Devin Wade
Defendant:
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) 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.
