Cases 1 - 10 of 311
Isaac v. Clemente et al
as 1:2024cv01593
Plaintiff:
Francis J Isaac
Defendant:
Roderic Andrew Clemente, Tram Clemente and Hippo Insurance Services
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Larez et al v. Wilkens et al
as 1:2024cv00324
Plaintiff:
Gary Larez, Brandon Stone, Dewayne Clements and others
Defendant:
FNU Wilkens, GCCF, Jacob LNU and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Clements v. Rios et al
as 2:2024cv00486
Petitioner:
James Clements
Respondent:
Hector Rios and Attorney General for the State of New Mexico
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Konecny v. The Big M Casino, et al
as 24-1090
Plaintiff:
J. ALAN KONECNY, AKA Alan J. Konecny
Defendant:
THE BIG M CASINO, GEORGE FREELAND, DANA GOODELL and others
Konecny (PS) v. Big M Casino, The et al
as 1:2023cv03250
Plaintiff:
J. Alan Konecny
Defendant:
Big M Casino, The, George Freeland, Dana Goodell and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
United States v. Clements
as 23-8083
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
MICHAEL SHANE LOURCEY CLEMENTS
United States v. Stubbs
as 24-6009
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
CLAYTON CLEMENT STUBBS
Clements v. United States of America
as 2:2023cv00171
Petitioner:
Michael Shane Lourcey Clements
Respondent:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2023cv02782
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 20 U.S.C. § 1415 - IDEA: Challenge Decision re: Education for Handicapped
Kilman v. Stancil et al
as 1:2023cv01176
Plaintiff:
Tobi Kilman
Defendant:
Andre Stancil, Dean Williams, Rick Raemisch and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
