Cases 1 - 10 of 486
Norton v. Caternolo
as 2:2024cv00540
Petitioner:
Daniel Norton
Respondent:
R Caternolo
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federal)
Francisco Cordon v. Gen Digital, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02434
Plaintiff:
Francisco Gordon
Defendant:
Gen Digital, Inc. erronously sued as Norton Lifelock Inc,
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Default
Orozco v. Norton, et al.
as 24-798
Plaintiff:
MARCUS KELO OROZCO
Defendant:
BENNETTE NORTON, Dr., M.D., "Ben", JOHN MYRICK, TROY BOWSER and others
Norton v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 3:2024cv05098
Plaintiff:
Joel T H Norton
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Interested Party:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
United States of America v. Norton
as 24-132
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
ANGELINA LARAE NORTON
Norton v. Strategic Staffing Solutions, L.C. et al
as 3:2023cv06648
Plaintiff:
Paula Norton
Defendant:
Strategic Staffing Solutions, L.C. and Cynthia J. Pasky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv10371
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrimination
Norton v. Jacquez
as 3:2023cv01835
Petitioner:
Daniel Emerson Norton
Respondent:
Israel Jacquez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Norton v. Jacquez
as 3:2023cv01765
Petitioner:
Daniel Emerson Norton
Respondent:
Israel Jacquez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)
Norton, III v. Hutchingson et al
as 2:2023cv01357
Petitioner:
Joseph Martin Norton, III
Respondent:
William Hutchingson and Nevada Attorney General
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
