Cases 31 - 40 of 212
DH Long Point Management LLC v. NLRB
as 20-1030
Respondent:
National Labor Relations Board
Petitioner:
DH Long Point Management LLC
Intervenor:
Unite Here Local 11
Ruprecht Company v. UNITE HERE Local 1
as 1:2021cv02549
Defendant:
UNITE HERE Local 1
Plaintiff:
Ruprecht Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv01113
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
OTG Management PHL, LLC v. UNITE HERE, Local 274
as 2:2021cv00923
Plaintiff:
OTG Management PHL, LLC
Defendant:
UNITE HERE, Local 274
Cause Of Action: 09 U.S.C. § 1
Unite Here Retirement Fund and Trustees of the Unite Here Retirement Fund et al v. Edward Village Group, LLC et al
as 1:2021cv02141
Plaintiff:
UNITE HERE RETIREMENT FUND and TRUSTEES OF THE UNITE HERE RETIREMENT FUND and UNITE HERE LOCAL 450
Defendant:
Does One through Ten, EDWARD CHICAGO MANAGEMENT, LLC, Edward Village Group, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1381
UNITE HERE! Local 2 v. Tastes on the Fly, Inc.
as 4:2021cv01801
Defendant:
Tastes on the Fly, Inc.
Plaintiff:
UNITE HERE! Local 2
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185
Unite Here Local 30 v. Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Na
as 21-55017
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITE HERE LOCAL 30
Defendant / Appellant:
SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION
Derek McSmith v. Unite Here Local 23
as 21-10078
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DEREK LEROY MCSMITH
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITE HERE LOCAL 23
Unite Here! Local 878, AFL-CIO v. NLRB
as 21-70388
Petitioner:
UNITE HERE! LOCAL 878, AFL-CIO
Respondent:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Davidson Hotel Company, LLC v. NLRB
as 19-1235
Petitioner:
Davidson Hotel Company, LLC, (Chicago Marriot at Medical District/UIC) and Davidson Hotel Company, LLC, (Chicago Marriott at Medical District/UIC)
Respondent:
National Labor Relations Board
Intervenor:
Unite Here Local 1
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.
