Montes v. Reed
Plaintiff: Autumn Montes
Defendant: Mike Reed
Case Number: 4:2017cv00565
Filed: October 10, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma
Office: Tulsa Office
County: Mayes
Presiding Judge: John E Dowdell
Presiding Judge: Jodi F Jayne
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
September 27, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 14 OPINION AND ORDER by Judge John E Dowdell ; granting in part 10 Motion to Dismiss (JED1, Chambers)
Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Oklahoma Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Montes v. Reed
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Autumn Montes
Represented By: Alisa G Hopkins
Represented By: Jason Charles Messenger
Represented By: Charles Loy Richardson
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Mike Reed
Represented By: Michael Lee Carr
Represented By: Ambre Camille Gooch
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?