Cases 11 - 20 of 20
Gray et al v. Hardy et al
as 1:2011cv07912
Plaintiff:
Doiakah Gray and Jose Rodriguez
Defendant:
Marcus Hardy, Guy Pierce, Salvador Godinez and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2011cv06546
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Rodriguez v. Cannon et al
as 1:2011cv08503
Plaintiff:
Jose Rodriguez
Defendant:
Chris Cannon
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rodriguez v. Hardy et al
as 1:2011cv05514
Plaintiff:
Jose Rodriguez
Defendant:
Samuel Chmell, Partha Ghosh, La Tanya Williams and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Gray et al v. Central Publication Review Committee et al
as 1:2011cv04870
Plaintiff:
Doiakah Gray, Jose Rodriguez and Johnnie Woods
Defendant:
Central Publication Review Committee, Chris Cannon and John Doe (s)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv06747
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv03640
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2009cv03639
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Rodriguez v. True Painting & Remodeling, Inc. et al
as 1:2007cv01949
Plaintiff:
Jose Rodriguez and Jose Rodriguez
Defendant:
True Painting & Remodeling, Inc., True Painting & Remodeling, Inc., Sergio Juarez and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
Rodriguez et al v. AmeriQuest Mortgage Company et al
as 1:2007cv01082
Plaintiff:
Jose Rodriguez, Jose Rodriguez, Jose Rodriguez and others
Defendant:
AmeriQuest Mortgage Company, AmeriQuest Mortgage Company, AmeriQuest Mortgage Company and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
