Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Wang et al v. Grubhub Inc.
as 3:2023cv00223
Plaintiff:
Charles Wang, Marilee Bogaert, Aaron Aseltine and others
Defendant:
Grubhub Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2021cv00576
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Wang v. Thomson et al
as 5:2014cv02388
Plaintiff:
Charles Wang
Defendant:
Taylor Thomson, David Systrom, K. Hesse and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Williams v. EAdgear Holdings USA, Inc., et al
as 3:2014cv00504
Plaintiff:
Randal Ray Williams
Defendant:
EAdgear Holdings USA, Inc., eAdGear, Inc., GoFun Places, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Breach of Contract
eAdGear, Inc. et al v. Williams et al
as 3:2013cv01186
Plaintiff:
eAdGear, Inc. and GoFunPlaces, Inc.
Defendant:
Randal Williams, Prosperity Formula, LLC, Jubimax LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Wang v. Brown et al
as 3:2011cv05648
Plaintiff:
Charles Wang
Defendant:
Jerry Brown, Kamala Harris, Matt Cate and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Wang v. De Jesus et al
as 4:2011cv00157
Petitioner:
Charles Wang
Respondent:
C. De Jesus, N. Starr, C. Fritz and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Wang v. Smith et al
as 4:2010cv05823
Petitioner:
Charles Wang
Defendant:
S. Smith, K. Shapero, A. Alem and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
Wang v. De Jesus et al
as 4:2010cv04629
Petitioner:
Charles Wang
Respondent:
Carlos De Jesus, State CDCR Head, Dept of Corrections and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Wang v. Pulido et al
as 4:2010cv01453
Plaintiff:
Charles Wang
Defendant:
David Pulido, Alvarez, Joy Maulitz and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
