Cases 1 - 10 of 65
DURHAM v. MONICOLLO et al
as 3:2024cv03937
Plaintiff:
DYSHUN DURHAM
Defendant:
OFFICER MONICOLLO and DR. HASHMI
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02814
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 1:2023cv03518
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Hashmi et al v. Safeco Insurance Company of Indiana
as 3:2023cv02498
Plaintiff:
Suleman Hashmi and Maarjan Hashmi
Defendant:
Safeco Insurance Company of Indiana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Breach of Contract- Insurance
Hashmi v. Asad Businesses, Inc. et al
as 4:2023cv03801
Plaintiff:
Syed Nadeem Hashmi
Defendant:
Asad Businesses, Inc., Gessner & Creek Bend, LLC, 10619 South Gessner, LLC and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv00266
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Hashmi et al v. 7-Eleven, Inc.
as 1:2023cv03776
Plaintiff:
Rehan S. Hashmi, Hashmi, Inc., Lykor Shack, Inc. and others
Defendant:
7-Eleven, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Declaratory Judgement
Trigo v. Fort Bend County et al
as 4:2023cv02172
Defendant:
Wellpath LLC, formerly known as Correct Care Solutions, LLC, Fort Bend County, Fort Bend County Jail and others
Plaintiff:
Esmeralda Trigo
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv01374
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Hernandez v. Muhammad
as 1:2022cv04869
Plaintiff:
Marquez Marco Hernandez
Defendant:
Dr. Hashmi Muhammad
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
