Cases 61 - 70 of 119
Villaflor v. U.S. Postal Service et al
as 2:2016cv01757
Plaintiff:
Ernesto Villaflor
Defendant:
U.S. Postal Service, Megan Brennan, Yun Hee Lee and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451
Rodriguez v. United States Of America
as 1:2016cv23620
Plaintiff:
Julio Rodriguez
Defendant:
United States Of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
GOMEZ et al v. TNJ ENTERPRISES INC. et al
as 2:2016cv04824
Plaintiff:
LUINY GOMEZ , EDICKSON GARCIA , JULIAN VASQUEZ and others
Defendant:
TNJ ENTERPRISES INC. , FRANK LAZAUSKUS and JOHN DOES # 1-10
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
In re: Julio Rodriguez
as 16-14343
Petitioner:
In re: JULIO RODRIGUEZ
Successive Habeas Respondent:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Saint Lot v. City Of New York et al
as 1:2016cv03879
Defendant:
City Of New York, Seeley, Julio Rodriguez and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Jean Saint Lot
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc. v. Rodriguez-Vega et al
as 3:2016cv01747
Plaintiff:
Reverse Mortgage Solutions, Inc.
Defendant:
Julio Rodriguez-Vega, Emelina Cuevas-Galarza, Conjugal Partnership Rodriguez-Cuevas and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
RODRIGUEZ v. WASSERMAN et al
as 2:2015cv08767
Plaintiff:
JULIO RODRIGUEZ
Defendant:
KENNETH WASSERMAN and CAPITAL STACK FUND, LLC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Montanez et al v. Johnson et al
as 6:2015cv00807
Plaintiff:
Michael Montanez and Troy Copeland
Defendant:
Jorge Carvajal , Todd Raible , David McNamara and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Bond et al v. Welpak Corporation et al
as 1:2015cv02403
Plaintiff:
Nakia Bond, Julio Rodriguez and William Torres
Defendant:
Christopher Fox, Thomas Ryan and Welpak Corporation
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
Julio Rodriguez v. W. L. Montgomery
as 2:2015cv02802
Respondent:
W. L. Montgomery
Petitioner:
Julio Rodriguez
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.
