Cases 1 - 10 of 41
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2024cv00608
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
Kevin Potter, et al v. David Newkirk, et al
as 23-2625
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KEVIN POTTER and MARGUERITE POTTER
Defendant:
DAVID NEWKIRK, ROBERT ROBBINS, JOSE RODRIGUEZ and others
Defendant / Appellee:
CUMBERLAND COUNTY SHERRIFS DEPARTMENT NEW JERSEY, PROSECUTOR CUMBERLAND COUNTY, JON REILLY and others
Rodriguez v. USA
as 3:2023cv00915
Petitioner:
Gimy Jose Rodriguez
Respondent:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
RODRIGUEZ-CHAVEZ v. WARDEN
as 1:2022cv07343
Petitioner:
JOSE RODRIGUEZ-CHAVEZ
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
RODRIGUEZ-ORTIZ v. H.P. SERVICES, CORP.
as 2:2021cv11509
Plaintiff:
JOSE RODRIGUEZ-ORTIZ
Defendant:
H.P. SERVICES, CORP.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
VASADI et al v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
as 2:2021cv10238
Plaintiff:
SCOTT TEITSCH, DANIELLE MOYER, JEAN VASADI and others
Defendant:
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301
USA v. Gimy Rodriguez
as 20-3295
Defendant / Appellant:
GIMY JOSE RODRIGUEZ, a/k/a Carvo
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
MANENTE et al v. APPLE INC. et al
as 2:2020cv15601
Defendant:
APPLE INC., JOSE RODRIGUEZ, STAPLES and others
Plaintiff:
NICHOLAS MANENTE and ASHLEY LEBRON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
CRUZ v. RODRIGUEZ et al
as 1:2019cv20906
Defendant:
DET. DANIEL CHOE, PROSECUTORS OFFICE, DET. JOSE RODRIGUEZ and others
Plaintiff:
JAVIAR ROJAS CRUZ
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Kevin Potter, et al v. David Newkirk, et al
as 19-1728
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KEVIN POTTER and MARGUERITE POTTER
Defendant / Appellee:
CHRISTOPHER CARELLA, SHARRON BURNETT, JACKIE READ and others
Not Yet Classified:
DELMARVA ENTERPRISE
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.
