Cases 71 - 80 of 5,182
US v. Soriano
as 23-2090
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant / Appellant:
MICHAEL STEVEN SORIANO, a/k/a Michael Esteven Soriano
Pinney v. Bridgewater State Hospital, et al
as 23-2077
Plaintiff:
JOHNATHAN PINNEY, a/k/a Gitapushy Val Angel
Defendant:
BRIDGEWATER STATE HOSPITAL, DR. NIKHIL MATHEWS, CITY OF BOSTON and others
Interested Party:
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, SUMBUL SIDDIQUI, Mayor, CHRISTINE ELOW and others
Pinney v. City of Cambridge, et al
as 23-2075
Plaintiff:
GITAPUSHY VAL ANGEL and JOHNATHAN PINNEY, a/k/a Gitapushy Val Angel
Defendant:
CAMBRIDGE, MA and HEIDI MAE WEILMUENSTER
PLZ Corp. v. Jeunesse, Inc.
as 1:2023cv13175
Plaintiff:
PLZ Corp. f/k/a Precise Packaging, LLC, PLZ Corp. and Precise Packaging, LLC
Defendant:
Jeunesse, Inc. f/k/a Jeunesse, LLC, Jeunesse, Inc. and Jeunesse, LLC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Porter Jr v. Commonwealth of MA et al
as 4:2023cv40179
Plaintiff:
Richard W Porter Jr
Defendant:
Commonwealth of MA, City of Methuen and John K Murphy
Debtor:
Phyllis M Porter
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Efron Dorado, S.E. v. Zurixx, LLC et al
as 3:2023cv01611
Plaintiff:
EFRON DORADO SE and Efron Dorado, S.E.
Defendant:
Zurixx, LLC and DAVID K. BROADBENT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal
US v. Issak
as 23-2048
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant / Appellant:
ABDULLAHI ISSAK, a/k/a T, a/k/a Tony, a/k/a Tee
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv13050
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
US v. Rodriguez-Reyes
as 23-2037
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant / Appellant:
JERRY OMAR RODRIGUEZ-REYES, a/k/a Quiri
US v. Rodriguez-Maldonado
as 23-1997
Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant / Appellant:
MICHAEL J. RODRIGUEZ-MALDONADO, a/k/a Michael Rodriguez-Maldonado
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.
