Cases 1 - 10 of 40
Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Smith et al
as 2:2023cv00020
Plaintiff:
Great Lakes Insurance SE
Defendant:
Leonard Scott Smith, Jose Luis Padilla, Padilla Masonry, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
Jose Luis Padilla v. W S V D Medical et al
as 5:2022cv01570
Plaintiff:
Jose Luis Padilla
Defendant:
W S V D Medical, MD Chalary, Nutritionist W.V.D.C. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Oliva v. John's Cafe et al
as 3:2022cv00383
Plaintiff:
Luis Padilla Oliva
Defendant:
John's Cafe and John Spiros
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Luis Padilla v. General Motors LLC
as 5:2021cv01244
Plaintiff:
Luis Padilla
Defendant:
General Motors LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301
FILING ERROR
as 1:2021cv01140
Plaintiff:
Luis Padilla
Defendant:
General Motors LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301
In Re: Disposable Contact Lens Antitrust Litigation
as 3:2015md02626
Defendant:
ABB/Con-cise Optical Group, LLC, ABB Optical Group, 1-800-Contacts.Com and others
Plaintiff:
Jennifer Cristiano, Heather Butcher, Christian Miller and others
Interested Party:
Jeffrey Stetler, Benjamin W. Hewitt, Monika Pasek and others
In Re:
In Re: Disposable Contact Lens Antitrust Litigation and Evan A. Strassberg
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0001
United States of America v. Perry (Padilla)
as 21-1998
Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant:
Damien Perry, AKA Primo and Cecil Stanley
Defendant / Appellant:
Luis Padilla, AKA Twin
Padilla v. City of Fairfield et al
as 2:2020cv01966
Defendant:
City of Fairfield and Nicholas Amavisca
Plaintiff:
Luis Padilla
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Padilla v. City of Fairfield et al
as 2:2020at00963
Defendant:
City of Fairfield and Nicholas Amavisca
Plaintiff:
Luis Padilla
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Padilla v. City of Richmond
as 4:2020cv04597
Defendant:
City of Richmond
Plaintiff:
Luis Padilla
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
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.
