Cases 1 - 10 of 2,034
United States v. Reilly
as 24-7047
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
STEVEN KENNETH REILLY
Cooper v. City of Gallup NM et al
as 1:2024cv00504
Plaintiff:
Kenneth E Cooper
Defendant:
City of Gallup NM, JM DeYoung, Louie Bonaguidi and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
United States v. Cromar
as 24-4053
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
PAUL KENNETH CROMAR
Kent (PS) v. Social Security Administration
as 1:2024cv01305
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Ray Kent
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Hensley et al v. Wilkens et al
as 1:2024cv00444
Plaintiff:
Jeremy Hensley, Domenique Sedillo, Gabriel Perez and others
Defendant:
FNU Wilkens, Jacob LNU and Alisha Tafoya
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Moss v. Social Security Administration
as 6:2024cv00152
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Don Moss
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
Tulsa Athletics, LLC v. National Premier Soccer League, Inc. et al
as 4:2024cv00194
Plaintiff:
Tulsa Athletics, LLC and Tulsa Athletic, The
Defendant:
National Premier Soccer League, Inc., Cindy Spera and Kenneth Farrell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-5049
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Ellis Jr. v. Sandoval et al
as 1:2024cv00395
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Guy Ellis Jr.
Defendant:
Angela Sandoval, John Tekin, Dea Zantow and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Cromar v. Davis County Correctional Facility
as 1:2024cv00064
Petitioner:
Paul Kenneth Cromar
Respondent:
Davis County Correctional Facility
Not Yet Classified:
Prisoner Litigation Unit
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
