Cases 31 - 40 of 3,481
Navarro v. Target Corporation
as 1:2024cv00280
Plaintiff:
Grace Navarro
Defendant:
Target Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Navarro v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv01199
Plaintiff:
Alejandro Navarro
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Navarro Ubaldo v. F&A Border Transport, LLC et al
as 3:2024cv00047
Plaintiff:
Maria Brizeida Navarro Ubaldo
Defendant:
F&A Border Transport, LLC, Alejandro Issac Sanchez, LoHi Logistics LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Auto Negligence
Navarro v. 24 Hour Fitness USA, LLC
as 4:2024cv01185
Plaintiff:
Margaret Navarro
Defendant:
24 Hour Fitness USA, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Oelker v. Traum et al
as 2:2024cv00355
Plaintiff:
Jeromy Oelker
Defendant:
Traum and Navarro
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Robert Crisp v. Richard Navarro et al
as 2:2024cv02550
Plaintiff:
Robert Crisp
Defendant:
Richard Navarro and Zack King
Dyson v. Lane et al
as 1:2024cv00944
Plaintiff:
Stefannie Dyson
Defendant:
Jordan Lane, Jasmine Jermaine Hall, John Doe and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jonathan Colorado Navarro v. Merrick Garland
as 24-1253
Petitioner:
JONATHAN ALEXANDER COLORADO NAVARRO
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General
Hill v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Sacramento
as 24-1583
Petitioner:
NATHAN HILL
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
Interested Party:
GAVIN NEWSOM, RALPH DIAZ, Director of CDCR, KEN CLARK, Warden of CSP-Corcoran and others
JW ARAP LLC v. Eduardo Navarro et al
as 2:2024cv01197
Plaintiff:
JW ARAP LLC
Defendant:
Eduardo E. Navarro, Antonio M. Navarro, Bartola Navarro 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.
