Cases 21 - 30 of 46
Nelson v. Colvin
as 6:2013cv06645
Plaintiff:
Michael Shawn Nelson
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
US v. Wendell Betancourt
as 13-7931
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
WENDELL EDWARD BETANCOURT, a/k/a Shawn Nelson, a/k/a Fire
US v. Wendell Betancourt
as 13-6501
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
WENDELL EDWARD BETANCOURT, a/k/a Shawn Nelson, a/k/a Fire
MANNING et al v. McHUGH et al
as 1:2012cv01802
Plaintiff:
SHAWN NELSON MANNING , AUTUMN MANNING , AMANDA ASTORGA and others
Defendant:
JOHN McHUGH, LEON B. PANETTA, ROBERT MUELLER III and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Tort Action
US v. Wendell Betancourt
as 12-7824
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
WENDELL EDWARD BETANCOURT, a/k/a Shawn Nelson, a/k/a Fire
Nelson et al v. Bank of America, NA
as 2:2012cv00366
Plaintiff:
Shawn Nelson and Erin Nelson
Defendant:
Bank of America, NA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv00105
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Manhattan Leasing Enterprises, Ltd. v. Nelson et al
as 0:2012cv60220
Plaintiff:
Manhattan Leasing Enterprises, Ltd.
Defendant:
Shawn Nelson and Louis Martin Blazer, III
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Perales v. Obama et al
as 3:2011cv00182
Defendant:
Richard Bruce Cheney, Peter Hoekstra, Christopher Samuel Bond and others
Plaintiff:
Azael Dythian Perales
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Perales et al v. United States Internal Revenue Service et al
as 1:2011cv02172
Petitioner:
Azael Dythian Perales
Respondent:
United States Internal Revenue Service, USA, U.S. Federal Bureau Of Investigation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
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.
