Cases 1 - 10 of 176
Gould et al v. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS et al
as 3:2024cv30033
Plaintiff:
Rodney Elliot Gould and Jonathan Chad Brown
Defendant:
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, Jonathan Kane, Maria C. Pereira and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
US v. Belhassan
as 24-1303
Appellant:
UNITED STATES
Defendant:
MEHDI BELHASSAN
Interested Party:
GUIOMAR ALVAREZ, DONNIE AMADO, MATHIEU AMAR and others
Lamons et al v. Delta Dental of California et al
as 1:2024cv10668
Plaintiff:
Kerry Lamons and Taneisha Robertson
Defendant:
Delta Dental of California and Delta Dental Insurance Company
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2024cv10655
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
US v. Belhassan
as 24-1208
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES
Defendant:
MEHDI BELHASSAN
Interested Party:
GUIOMAR ALVAREZ, DONNIE AMADO, MATHIEU AMAR and others
ROSS v. POLKY et al
as 2:2024cv00057
Plaintiff:
KERRY ROSS
Defendant:
MORGAN POLKY, TRACY CLARK and MAINE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Kerri A v. O'Malley
as 1:2024cv00069
Plaintiff:
Kerri Anderson
Defendant:
Martin O'Malley
Interested Party:
Social Security Administration-Office of General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 23-2056
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Galarza v. Pimentel et al
as 1:2023cv12881
Plaintiff:
Christina M Galarza
Defendant:
Katrina Pimentel, Kreg Espinola, Joseph L Michaud and others
Cause Of Action: 48 U.S.C. § 1985 Conspiracy/Deprivation Civil Rights
Glass et al v. Progress Software Corporation
as 1:2023cv12790
Plaintiff:
Kerri Glass, Corina Lowrey and Aldreamer Smith
Defendant:
Progress Software Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
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.
