Cases 11 - 20 of 22
In Re Application for Order Enforcing a Subpoena
as 1:2018mc91011
Petitioner:
R. Alexander Acosta
Respondent:
Brendin Lange and Anchor Building & Framing, LLC
Acosta v. J&T Enterprises Inc.
as 1:2017cv12488
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
J&T Enterprises Inc. and Suren Der Avedisian
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001
Acosta v. Cafe Misono, Inc. et al
as 1:2017cv11993
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Cafe Misono, Inc. and Kenneth Lee
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS v. U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services et al
as 1:2017cv11930
Plaintiff:
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
Defendant:
United States Department of Health and Human Services, Donald Wright, United States Department of the Treasury and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
ERROR-NOT USED
as 3:2017cv02073
Petitioner:
R. Alexander Acosta
Respondent:
Caribbean Fleet Wash Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: Administrative Subpoena
Acosta v. Caribbean Fleet Wash Services, Inc.
as 3:2017mc00448
Petitioner:
R. Alexander Acosta
Respondent:
Caribbean Fleet Wash Services, Inc.
Acosta v. Stanley
as 17-1619
Petitioner:
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA, Secretary of Labor
Respondent:
KEN STANLEY, d/b/a A+ Roofing
A.C. Castle Construction Co. v. Acosta, et al
as 17-1537
Petitioner:
A.C. CASTLE CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.
Interested Party:
DARYL J. PROVENCHER, d/b/a Provencher Home Improvement
Respondent:
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA, Secretary of Labor and US DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Acosta v. Private Cops Security, Corp et al
as 3:2017cv01707
Defendant:
Private Cops Security, Corp, Palmas Cops Security, Inc, Police Campus Security Management, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1938
Acosta v. Tavco Auburn St, Inc. et al
as 4:2017cv40070
Plaintiff:
R. Alexander Acosta
Defendant:
Tavco Auburn St, Inc. , Tavco Chandler St., Inc. , Tavco Grafton/Worcester, Inc. and others
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.
