Cases 1 - 10 of 21
Perez v. Paragon Contractors, et al
as 17-4025
Plaintiff - Appellee:
THOMAS E. PEREZ, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor
Defendant - Appellant:
PARAGON CONTRACTORS and BRIAN JESSOP, individually
Defendant:
JAMES JESSOP, individually
Perez v. Diversified Builders Incorporated et al
as 1:2017cv00053
Plaintiff:
Thomas E. Perez
Defendant:
Diversified Builders Incorporated and Ronald Mattox
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0216
Perez v. Solid Drywall et al
as 2:2016cv01025
Plaintiff:
Thomas E. Perez
Defendant:
Solid Drywall, Solid Construction Group and Frank LeBaron
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
Perez v. Phaze Concrete
as 2:2016cv00912
Plaintiff:
Thomas E. Perez
Defendant:
Phaze Concrete
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0206
Perez v. El Tequila, et al
as 16-5002
Plaintiff - Appellee:
THOMAS E. PEREZ, Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor
Defendant - Appellant:
EL TEQUILA, LLC and CARLOS AGUIRRE, individually
Perez v. Foreclosure Connection et al
as 2:2015cv00653
Plaintiff:
Thomas E. Perez
Defendant:
Foreclosure Connection and Jason Williams
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
Perez v. Jeffs et al
as 2:2015cv00643
Plaintiff:
Thomas E. Perez
Defendant:
Lyle Jeffs, Dale Barlow and Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0206
Perez et al v. Fog River et al
as 2:2015cv00500
Plaintiff:
Thomas E. Perez and United States Department of Labor
Defendant:
Fog River and John Bowen
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0201
Perez v. Kasim
as 4:2015cv00392
Plaintiff:
Thomas E Perez
Defendant:
Isam Kasim
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Hong Kong Entertainment (Overseas) Investment, Ltd. et al v. Perez et al
as 1:2014cv00028
Plaintiff:
Hong Kong Entertainment (Overseas) Investment, Ltd. and Man Kwan
Defendant:
Thomas E. Perez, David Weil, Ruben Rosalez and others
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.
