Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Lena Carillo v. US Foods Holding Corp et al
as 3:2026cv00546
Plaintiff:
Lena Carillo
Defendant:
US Foods Holding Corp, Jeremiah Relaford, Sherry Mack and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 26-1813
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cushman v Lombardo
as 2:2026cv02052
Plaintiff:
James W. Cushman
Defendant:
Joseph Lombardo, Sarah Hall, Farrington and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv03854
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 fd Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv00222
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv01857
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Carillo v. XPO Logistics Freight, Inc.
as 4:2026cv04599
Plaintiff:
Gil Carillo d/b/a Global Access Marketing
Defendant:
XPO Logistics Freight, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Interstate Commerce Act
Carillo v. Men's Central Jail - MCJ - Los Angeles CA
as 5:2026cv05527
Plaintiff:
Gabriel Carillo
Defendant:
Men's Central Jail - MCJ - Los Angeles CA
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Morales-Carillo v. Blanche
as 26-3568
Petitioner:
AMPARO BEATRIZ MORALES-CARILLO
Respondent:
TODD BLANCHE, ACTING ATTORNEY GENERAL
Judgment Creditor Plaintiffs v. Juarez Cartel
as 26-3559
Plaintiff:
JUDGMENT CREDITOR PLAINTIFFS
Interested Party:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
JUAREZ CARTEL, also known as Vincente Carillo Fuente Organization also known as La Linea also known as CFO
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.
