Cases 1 - 10 of 51
LUGO v. FU et al
as 2:2023cv05147
Plaintiff:
CHERRY-ANN LUGO
Defendant:
YU FU, HERTZ LLC, THE HERTZ CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
LUGO v. FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY ALLENWOOD
as 2:2023cv00926
Plaintiff:
RICHARD LUGO
Defendant:
FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS UNITED STATES PENITENTIARY ALLENWOOD
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
LUGO-ROSARIO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
as 5:2022cv04311
Plaintiff:
SOCORRO LUGO-ROSARIO
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
LUGO v. AMAZON.COM.DEDC, LLC,
as 2:2022cv02994
Plaintiff:
CRAIG LUGO
Defendant:
AMAZON.COM.DEDC, LLC,
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal- Personal Injury
ORTIZ-LUGO v. BRITTIAN et al
as 5:2022cv00325
Petitioner:
JULIO ANGEL ORTIZ-LUGO
Respondent:
KATHY BRITTIAN, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF BERKS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv01425
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv05832
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
LUGO v. SUPERINTENDENT, COAL TOWNSHIP et al
as 2:2020cv02281
Respondent:
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA and SUPERINTENDENT, COAL TOWNSHIP
Petitioner:
OSCAR LUGO
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Nieves v. Department of Corrections et al
as 4:2020cv00652
Defendant:
Jamie A. Dench, Hearing Examiner Schneck, Judge M.B. Moyle and others
Plaintiff:
Luis Nieves
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
LUGO v. DEANGELO et al
as 5:2019cv01442
Plaintiff:
ALEXANDER A. LUGO
Defendant:
RYAN MELLEY, CHRISTOPHER BAKER, CARLOS DEANGELO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
