Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Liu, et al. v. Bank of America, N.A., et al.
as 26-5825
Plaintiff:
LAWRENCE LIU, an individual and LING-LING LIU, an individual
Defendant:
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., a national banking association, THE CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, CHARLES SCHWAB BANK, a Texas-chartered state savings bank and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2026cv03175
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2026cv05085
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv04857
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2026cv02319
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (IMMIGRATION)
Wang, et al. v. Blanche
as 26-5115
Petitioner:
BOYU WANG and LING ZHOU
Respondent:
TODD BLANCHE, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv05774
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 8 U.S.C. § 1105 (a) Aliens: Habeas Corpus to Release INS Detainee
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv04293
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Zhao et al v. Newman et al
as 3:2026cv00658
Plaintiff:
Ke Zhao and Lu Shi
Defendant:
Jennifer M. Newman, Kelly Mahoney, Teresa Carlson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2026cv04036
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
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.
