Cases 1 - 10 of 119
ZEMEL v. UNITED AIRLINES, INC.
as 2:2024cv04034
Plaintiff:
DANIEL ZEMEL
Defendant:
UNITED AIRLINES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
ROJAS v. UNITED AIRLINES, INC.
as 2:2024cv03765
Plaintiff:
CURTIS DAVID ROJAS
Defendant:
UNITED AIRLINES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
RODRIGUEZ v. UNITED AIRLINES, INC.
as 2:2023cv23025
Plaintiff:
JOEL RODRIGUEZ
Defendant:
UNITED AIRLINES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv22988
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003 Job Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv22988
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2003 Job Discrimination
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv22801
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 704 Labor Litigation
HARPER v. UNITED AIRLINES
as 2:2023cv22329
Plaintiff:
DANIEL HARPER
Defendant:
UNITED AIRLINES
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
HARPER v. UNITED AIRLINES
as 3:2023cv22329
Plaintiff:
DANIEL HARPER
Defendant:
UNITED AIRLINES
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
LANGLEY v. UNITED AIRLINES INC. et al
as 2:2023cv20602
Plaintiff:
BRENDAN LANGLEY
Cross Defendant:
UNITED AIRLINES INC.
Defendant:
UNITED GROUND EXPRESS INC., PHILLIPE FRANCOIS RIVERA, EDWARD CETNAR and others
Cross Claimant:
PORT AUTHORITY OF NEW YORK AND NEW JERSEY and LOUIS P. KLOCK
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
VAFAEI-MAKHSOOS et al v. UNITED AIRLINES, INC. et al
as 2:2023cv20442
Plaintiff:
SHILDA VAFAEI-MAKHSOOS and ANDREW RUONA
Defendant:
UNITED AIRLINES, INC., JOHN DOE and JANE DOE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
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.
