Cases 1 - 10 of 19
Cortes-Cantillo v. Stone
as 3:2022cv00129
Petitioner:
Wender Jorge Cortes-Cantillo
Respondent:
Stacey N. Stone and Warden FCI Yazoo City Medium
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Jose L. Aceves et al v. Coach Royal 003 LP
as 8:2021cv01901
Plaintiff:
Jose L Aceves, Lucia E Ortega, Concepcion Alvarado and others
Defendant:
Coach Royal 003 LP, Kingsley Management Corporation, Does and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal -- Other Contract
Salvalzo, et al. v. Bexar County Adult Detention Center
as 5:2020cv00665
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Salvalzo, Antiquin Williams, Cody Flenoury and others
Defendant:
Bexar County Adult Detention Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2018cv16123
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Cortes Almazo v. Decker et al
as 1:2018cv09941
Respondent:
Attorney General Jefferson B. Sessions, Director Thomas R. Decker, Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen and others
Petitioner:
Jorge Cortes and Jorge Cortes Almazo
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 in
Cortes-Morales v. USA
as 3:2017cv02237
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Jorge Cortes-Morales
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
In re: Jorge Cortes, Jr.
as 15-15769
Petitioner:
In re: JORGE CORTES, JR.
Successive Habeas Respondent:
ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA
Cortes v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections et al
as 9:2015cv81765
Plaintiff:
Jorge Cortes, Jr.
Defendant:
Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections and Florida Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 13-15546
Petitioner - Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent - Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Jorge Cortes-Morales v. Suzanne Hasting
as 13-13659
Petitioner - Appellant:
JORGE CORTES-MORALES
Respondent - Appellee:
SUZANNE R. HASTINGS
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.
