Cases 1 - 10 of 30
Medina v. Miller et al
as 3:2024cv00824
Plaintiff:
Tina Medina
Defendant:
Judge Laura H. Miller, Judge Maureen H. Hallahan, Judge Jose S. Castillo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cv Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Ballester v. Miller et al
as 3:2024cv00454
Plaintiff:
Eleanor Ballester
Defendant:
Judge Laura H. Miller, Presiding Judge Maureen F. Hallahan, Judge CJ Mody and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cv Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Miller v. Social Security, Commissioner of
as 2:2023cv12237
Plaintiff:
Laura Ann Miller
Defendant:
Social Security, Commissioner of
Interested Party:
(Court Use Only) SSA Notification - Office of General Counsel
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
Scott v. EVO Payments, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv08600
Plaintiff:
Robert Scott
Defendant:
EVO Payments, Inc., James G. Kelly, Mark A. Chancy and others
Dixon v. EVO Payments, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv01322
Plaintiff:
Brian Dixon
Defendant:
EVO Payments, Inc., Rafik R. Sidhom, James G. Kelly and others
Moore v. EVO Payments, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv08518
Plaintiff:
Jon Moore
Defendant:
EVO Payments, Inc., Rafik R. Sidhom, James G. Kelly and others
Waterman v. EVO Payments, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv08090
Plaintiff:
Marc Waterman
Defendant:
EVO Payments, Inc., Mark A. Chancy, Vahe A. Dombalagian and others
Wolfson v. EVO Payments, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv08104
Plaintiff:
Barbara Wolfson
Defendant:
EVO Payments, Inc., James G. Kelly, Rafik R. Sidhom and others
Whitfield v. EVO Payments, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv08085
Plaintiff:
Matthew Whitfield
Defendant:
EVO Payments, Inc., Mark A. Chancy, Vahe A. Dombalagian and others
Bushansky v. Evo Payments, Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv03785
Plaintiff:
Stephen Bushansky
Defendant:
Evo Payments, Inc., James G. Kelly, Rafik R. Sidhom and others
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.
