Cases 1 - 10 of 28
Ruth Hobart v. County of Orange et al
as 8:2023cv02004
Plaintiff:
Ruth Hobart
Defendant:
County of Orange, Don Barnes, Joshua McAuliffe and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Civil Rights Act
McAuliffe v. Kijakazi
as 3:2023cv04478
Plaintiff:
Coco Joliana McAuliffe
Defendant:
Kilolo Kijakazi and SSA (INTERESTED PARTY / NEF)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 416 Denial of Social Security Benefits
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2023cv00365
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 08 U.S.C. § 1329 Writ of Mandamus to Adjudicate Visa Petition
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv00356
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Pittman v. City and County of San Francisco et al
as 3:2022cv02412
Plaintiff:
Xavier Pittman
Defendant:
City and County of San Francisco and Zachary McAuliffe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Rack Safety Products, LLC v. Double Backstop, Inc. et al
as 8:2021cv02110
Plaintiff:
Rack Safety Products, LLC
Defendant:
Double Backstop, Inc., Kevin Mcauliffe, Does 1-10 and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1114
(PC) Luedtke v. Griesbach et al
as 1:2021cv00718
Defendant:
Anthony Ishii, Dale Drozd, Kirk Obear and others
Plaintiff:
James Luedtke
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Luedtke v. Drozd et al
as 1:2020cv01662
Defendant:
Dale Drozd, Erica Grosjean, Barbara McAuliffe and others
Plaintiff:
James Luedtke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bonilla v. Clay
as 4:2020cv04304
Defendant:
Michael E. Delllastrillo, Toni Cantil-Sakauye, Andrew G. Schopler and others
Plaintiff:
Steven Wayne Bonilla
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Bonilla v. Clay et al
as 3:2020cv03167
Defendant:
Morrison C. England, Jr., Toni Contil-Sakauye, Jeffrey W. Horner and others
Plaintiff:
Steven Wayne Bonilla
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
