Cases 51 - 60 of 803
XILOJITZEP v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION
as 1:2022cv03788
Plaintiff:
RAMIRO XILOJITZEP
Defendant:
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
TEKLU et al v. U STREET PARKING, INC. et al
as 1:2022cv03721
Plaintiff:
FRIAT TEKLU and TEKLU FOLLE ODA
Defendant:
U STREET PARKING, INC. and HENOK TESFAYE
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
MOSS v. MCDONOUGH
as 1:2023cv00276
Plaintiff:
SHA-KIL MOSS
Not Classified By Court:
DENIS MCDONOUGH
Defendant:
DENIS R. MCDONOUGH
DAMASKE v. MCDONOUGH
as 1:2023cv00278
Plaintiff:
ROBERT P. DAMASKE
Defendant:
DENIS MCDONOUGH and DENIS R. MCDONOUGH
HAGGAR v. MCDONOUGH
as 1:2023cv00277
Plaintiff:
DIETER HAGGAR
Not Classified By Court:
DENIS MCDONOUGH
Defendant:
DENIS R. MCDONOUGH
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv03563
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
LOPEZ v. TRINH COMPANY, INC. et al
as 1:2022cv03499
Plaintiff:
AMILCAR LOPEZ
Defendant:
THE TRINH COMPANY, INC., GENERAL BUILDING SERVICES, INC., TOAN PHU TRINH and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
PORTILLO DIAZ v. JIAOTASIDI, LLC et al
as 1:2022cv03542
Plaintiff:
JOSE NELSON PORTILLO DIAZ
Defendant:
JIAOTASIDI, LLC doing business as BASEBOWL, LEOPOLD LIAO and MING YU
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
ROTH v. WEST END PLASTIC SURGERY
as 1:2022cv03398
Plaintiff:
SHARON ROTH
Defendant:
WEST END PLASTIC SURGERY
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
PEREZ et al v. HITT CONTRACTING, INC. et al
as 1:2022cv03156
Plaintiff:
JORGE PEREZ, ALEJANDRA TORRES and ARYS SOLANO
Defendant:
HITT CONTRACTING, INC., BROTHER'S MECHANICAL, INC., DAYCJ PLUMBING & MECHANICAL INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 216 Fair Labor Standards Act
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.
