Cases 1 - 10 of 4,128
United States v. Pedro Zambrano
as 24-2004
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Pedro Zambrano, also known as Peter Rivera, also known as JR Acevedo, also known as Manuel Acevedo, also known as Jorge Meraz, also known as Rafael Ramirez, also known as John Crish, also known as Jose Perez, Jose Zavala
Republic of Panama v. Omega Engineering LLC et al
as 1:2024cv21097
Plaintiff:
Republic of Panama
Defendant:
Omega Engineering LLC and Oscar Rivera
Cause Of Action: 27 U.S.C. § 0185 Enforcement of Arbitration Award
Duarte Rivera v. Garland
as 24-3027
Petitioner:
EDUARDO DUARTE RIVERA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2024cv02006
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1691 Equal Credit Opportunity Act
United States of America v. Delgado
as 24-2890
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
MICHAEL RIVERA DELGADO
United States v. Humberto Rivera-Moreno
as 24-1969
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Humberto Rivera-Moreno, also known as Beto, also known as Erik Moctezuma, also known as Erik Moctezuma-Espindola, also known as Eduardo Rivera-Moreno, also known as Jose Chavez
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc. v. Tamez et al
as 5:2024cv00467
Plaintiff:
Joe Hand Promotions, Inc.
Defendant:
Yvette Rivera Tamez a/k/a Yvette Rivera, individually and d/b/a Cupples Sports Bar and Guadalupe Esparza, Jr. individually and d/b/a Cupples Sports Bar
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Rivera-Cruz v. Garland
as 24-1146
Petitioner:
JENNIFER RIVERA-CRUZ and KEYSHA CRUZ-RIVERA
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY GENERAL
Pearson v. City of New York
as 24-1167
Plaintiff:
LESTER PEARSON
Defendant:
CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, DARCEL CLARK, Bronx County District Attorney; In His Personal Capacity 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.
