Angelosante files civil suit against Aramark Management Services in New Jersey
Case Summary
ANGELOSANTE filed a civil case against ARAMARK MANAGEMENT SERVICES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP and others in the District of New Jersey, docket 25-cv-13911. No summary details are available. The case likely involves employment or service contract issues given the defendant's business nature.
No timeline activity recorded yet. This page will grow as rulings and filings land.
Key Issues
- • Employment or service contract dispute
- • Business defendant
Docket Snapshot
Court
D.N.J.
District of New Jersey · 3rd Circuit · NJ
Docket
Not captured
Civil
Stage
Active litigation
Active
Filed
Date unavailable
Not in the available feed
Latest Filing
3:25-cv-13911 ANGELOSANTE v. ARAMARK MANAGEMENT SERVICES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP et al
Other · May 11, 2026
Coverage
0 articles
0 sources tracked
Participants
1 Defendant, 1 Plaintiff
2 linked entities
Judge
Not assigned in feed
What the record shows
This case is tied to District of New Jersey, a federal district court in NJ.
The newest docket activity we have is a other dated May 11, 2026.
The visible party/entity graph currently includes ARAMARK MANAGEMENT SERVICES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, 3:25-cv-13911 ANGELOSANTE.
No independent press coverage is attached yet; this page is currently docket-led rather than media-led.
About This Court
District of New Jersey (D.N.J.) is a federal district court in the 3rd Circuit, NJ.
Case Timeline
1 event3:25-cv-13911 ANGELOSANTE v. ARAMARK MANAGEMENT SERVICES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP et al
The case ANGELOSANTE v. ARAMARK MANAGEMENT SERVICES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP et al was filed under docket number 3:25-cv-13911. No specific action or ruling was recorded in this event, indicating it might be an initial filing or administrative entry. This sets the stage for future litigation between the parties.
settings_backup_restore Data provenance expand_more
Sources tracked
0 outlets · 0 articles
Timeline events
1 record on file
Last updated
1 hour, 7 minutes ago
Juryvine aggregates docket entries from PACER/CourtListener, press coverage, and GDELT signals. Ingestion timestamps do not appear in the What Changed feed — that reflects real court activity only.