Cases 1 - 10 of 20
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02703
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Belmora LLC v. American Private Label Products, LLC
as 2:2021mc00008
Plaintiff:
Belmora LLC
Defendant:
American Private Label Products, LLC, ANA WOOD, JAMES WOOD and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
BELMORA LLC v. AMERICAN PRIVATE LABEL PRODUCTS, LLC et al
as 2:2019cv15365
Defendant:
ANA WOOD, JOHN DOES 1 - 50, AMERICAN PRIVATE LABEL PRODUCTS, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
BELMORA LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 44
WOODS v. ROBINSON et al
as 1:2018cv02512
Petitioner:
JAMES WOODS
Respondent:
GEORGE ROBINSON and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
WOODS v. ZUNIGA
as 1:2017cv00211
Petitioner:
JAMES WOODS
Respondent:
RAFAEL ZUNIGA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
WOODS v. BLENDER et al
as 2:2014cv05961
Plaintiff:
JAMES WOODS
Defendant:
GREGG BLENDER and CARRIE EVENS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. WOOD
as 2:2012cv07657
Petitioner:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Respondent:
JAMES WOOD
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 160 (1) National Labor Relations Act
SAMOLES et al v. LACEY TOWNSHIP et al
as 3:2012cv03066
Plaintiff:
DANIEL SAMOLES , JOHN SAMOLES and JOSEPH SAMOLES
Defendant:
LACEY TOWNSHIP, WILLIAM NALLY, SERGEANT MICHAEL DI BELLA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
WOOD v. PRIDE ACCOUNTING SERVICES
as 2:2011cv05325
Plaintiff:
JAMES WOOD
Defendant:
PRIDE ACCOUNTING SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
WOODS et al v. THE CELOTEX CORPORATION et al
as 2:2011cv63718
Plaintiff:
JAMES WOODS and ANNA DANDRIDGE WOODS
Defendant:
THE CELOTEX CORPORATION , GAF CORPORATION, OWENS CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
