Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Willform v. Catfish Bend Casino et al
as 3:2023cv00001
Plaintiff:
Kelvin Devell Willform, Sr
Defendant:
Catfish Bend Casino, Kehl Family, Randy Winegard, Jr. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 vp Violation of Due Process and Equal Protection
Schaefer v. Walmart Stores, Inc. et al
as 1:2019cv00101
Plaintiff:
Toni Marie Schaefer
Defendant:
Walmart Inc., Walmart Stores, Inc., Walmart Stores, Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Real Estate Equities Development LLC et al v. Village Cooperative of Crow Creek
as 3:2019cv00054
Plaintiff:
Real Estate Equities Development LLC, Keith S. Jans, Shane M. Wright and others
Defendant:
Village Cooperative of Crow Creek
Cause Of Action: 09 U.S.C. § 0004
Dan Schaefer v. Owens Corning Roofing and Asphalt, LLC
as 4:2017cv00268
Plaintiff:
Dan Schaefer and Maureen Schaefer
Defendant:
Owens Corning Roofing and Asphalt, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Fleshner v. Tiedt et al
as 6:2015cv02033
Plaintiff:
Billy Duane Card Fleshner
Defendant:
Kenneth Wayne Wiley, Matthew Tiedt, Kyle Shores and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
Schaefer et al v. Putnam et al
as 6:2014cv02077
Plaintiff:
Larry Schaefer and Elaine Schaefer
Defendant:
Dale L Putnam, Putnam Law Office, Raymond Schaefer and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Schaefer v. Roggentien
as 1:2008cv00040
Petitioner:
Lance Todd Schaefer
Respondent:
Nick Sheriff Roggentien
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Peterson v. Prosser et al
as 5:2008cv04005
Plaintiff:
Paul George Peterson
Defendant:
Mark Prosser, Todd Erskine, Ray Eickholt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Schaefer v. Roggentien
as 1:2007cv00073
Petitioner:
Lance Tod Schaefer
Respondent:
Nick Roggentien
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 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.
