Cases 1 - 10 of 60
KUMAR v. ATTORNEY GENERAL USA
as 1:2023cv01314
Plaintiff:
ROHIT KUMAR
Defendant:
ATTORNEY GENERAL USA and MERRICK GARLAND
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Fredrickson v. Attorney General (USA)
as 2:2020cv01110
Plaintiff:
Tim Fredrickson
Defendant:
Attorney General (USA)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Tim Fredrickson v. Attorney General USA
as 2:2020cv07065
Petitioner:
Tim Fredrickson
Respondent:
Attorney General USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2020cv01613
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Mercado v. Berryhill et al
as 1:2019cv11172
Defendant:
Acting Commissioner Nancy A. Berryhill and Andrew M. Saul
Not Yet Classified:
U.S. Attorney Massachusetts and Attorney General USA
Plaintiff:
Santiago Rosario Mercado
Interested Party:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
AZOUKI v. BARR et al
as 2:2019cv12468
Petitioner:
Charbel Azouki
Respondent:
Attorney General USA William Barr, Kevin McAleenan, WILLIAM BARR and others
Defendant:
Matthew Albence and William Anderson
Kosta v. Masachusetts State Police
as 1:2019cv10605
Defendant:
Famingham Police, Revere Police Department, Kristen Bourdeau and others
Plaintiff:
Demetri Kosta
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2018cv00252
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Undetermined:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Tang v. Attorney General USA et al
as 3:2014cv00197
Petitioner:
Kwok Tai Tang
Respondent:
Attorney General USA, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security and Marc J. Moore
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2013cv02150
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
