Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv01480
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1105 (a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Det
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv02337
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Amy R. GurveyIn re: Amy R. Gurvey
as 26-2867
Petitioner:
In re: AMY R. GURVEY
Respondent:
H. SCOTT GURVEY, M&T BANK INC, a NY Banking Corporation, SCHILLER KNAPP LEFKOWITZ & HERTZEL LLP and others
Ibrahim v. Blanche
as 26-2055
Petitioner:
MD IBRAHIM
Respondent:
TODD BLANCHE, ACTING UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Ibrahim v. State of Massachusetts
as 3:2026cv30119
Plaintiff:
Abdul K Ibrahim
Defendant:
State of Massachusetts
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2026cv00511
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Interested Party:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Fudol v. Crast Inc.
as 1:2026cv06354
Plaintiff:
Ibrahim Fudol
Defendant:
Crast Inc. doing business as AFC Home Warranty
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2026cv00851
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Unknown:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Powell v. Uber Technologies, Inc. et al
as 4:2026cv05876
Plaintiff:
Roxanne Powell
Defendant:
Uber Technologies, Inc., Rasier, LLC, Al Joron Ibrahim and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv04470
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
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.
