Cases 1 - 10 of 137
COHEN v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 1:2023cv03658
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY COHEN
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, EDDIE ANDERSON, EMERY MCCOY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Matthew Sherven v. USA, et al
as 23-5174
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Matthew J. Sherven
Defendant / Appellee:
United States of America, Central Intelligence Agency, William Burns, Director of the Central Intelligence Agency and others
NASH v. ORFINGER et al
as 1:2023cv02264
Plaintiff:
LINDA A. NASH
Defendant:
RICHARD B. ORFINGER, WENDY W. BERGER, JAMES A. EDWARDS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
PAZ v. COHEN, STANLEY, LEIGHTON & RODNEY, PC
as 1:2023cv01905
Plaintiff:
AMELIA TERESA PAZ
Defendant:
COHEN, STANLEY, LEIGHTON & RODNEY, PC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 206 Collect Unpaid Wages
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv01327
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00491
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00061
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv00072
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petiti
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv03762
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv03512
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0706 Judicial Review of Agency Actions
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.
