Cases 41 - 50 of 63
Ruiz-Bueno, III et al v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv02548
Plaintiff:
John C Ruiz-Bueno, III and Michael Gay
Defendant:
Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc., Maria Sylvestri, Mary Compton and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ruiz v. USA
as 3:2014cv00063
Respondent:
United States of America
Petitioner:
Edmundo Ruiz, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Ruiz v. Coakley
as 4:2012cv02724
Petitioner:
Bernel Ruiz
Respondent:
Joe Coakley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2012cv00674
Petitioner:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Respondent:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Ruiz-Bueno, III et al v. Scott et al
as 2:2012cv00809
Plaintiff:
John C Ruiz-Bueno, III and Michael Anthony Gay
Defendant:
Zack Scott, Franklin County Corrections Center II, Doug Hahn and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ruiz et al v. Pugh et al
as 4:2012cv01043
Plaintiff:
Carlos Manuel Ruiz, Carlos Garcia, Miguel Feliz and others
Defendant:
Michael Pugh, Correctional Corporation of America and Northeast Ohio Correctional Center
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Ruiz v. Bureau of Prisons et al
as 4:2012cv00598
Petitioner:
Carlos Manuel Ruiz
Respondent:
Bureau of Prisons, Correctional Corporations of America and Michael Pugh
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Filing Error
as 1:2012dp20182
Plaintiff:
Santos Ruiz, Jr.
Defendant:
DePuy Inc , DePuy International, Ltd. , DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Ruiz, Jr. v. DePuy Inc et al
as 1:2012dp20183
Plaintiff:
Santos Ruiz, Jr.
Defendant:
DePuy Inc , DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc. , DePuy International, Ltd. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Ruiz v. Turner et al
as 1:2011cv01321
Defendant:
Earle B. Turner and City of Cleveland
Plaintiff:
Cristobal Ruiz
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
