Cases 1 - 10 of 25
Cortez v. ABF Freight System, Inc et al
as 2:2023cv00327
Plaintiff:
Francisco J. Cortez
Defendant:
ABF Freight System, Inc, Elizabeth L. Howard and Elizabeth L Howard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Tort/Motor Vehicle (P.I.)
BOSTIC v. DAVIS et al
as 1:2023cv01640
Plaintiff:
ANTAWAIN CORTEZ BOSTIC
Defendant:
B. DAVIS, C. RICHARDSON, B. LEMBOYE and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
PEDRAZA PULIDO et al v. REYNOSO et al
as 1:2023cv01296
Plaintiff:
JOSE JESUS PEDRAZA PULIDO, ARACELI CORTEZ, N. C. and others
Defendant:
RENE REYNOSO, JR., INDIANAPOLIS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT and CITY OF INDIANAPOLIS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv02238
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Barlag v. Gladieux et al
as 1:2022cv00408
Plaintiff:
Daniel Cortez Barlag and Daniel Cortez Butcher-Barlag
Defendant:
David J. Gladieux, Sickafoose, C. Ray and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Brown v. Indiana State of et al
as 3:2022cv00793
Plaintiff:
Kevin Cortez Brown and Brown
Defendant:
Indiana State of, Ron Neal, Dawn Buss and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Kendrick v. USA
as 2:2022cv00074
Petitioner:
Rickey Cortez Kendrick
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Rogers v. City of Hobart, Indiana et al
as 2:2021cv00111
Defendant:
Rod Gonzalez and City of Hobart, Indiana
Plaintiff:
Cortez Javan Rogers
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
BOYKINS v. WILSON et al
as 1:2021cv00316
Plaintiff:
DEADRIAN CORTEZ BOYKINS
Defendant:
DANIEL PIERCE, MARTIAL KLENISER and SHERI WILSON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Brown v. Warden
as 3:2021cv00079
Respondent:
Warden
Petitioner:
Kevin Cortez Brown
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
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.
