Cases 11 - 20 of 309
Haugen et al v. Tyvan
as 2:2023cv01107
Plaintiff:
Kelly Haugen and Amos Haugen
Defendant:
Joshua Tyvan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
(PC) Johnson v. Wilson et al
as 2:2023cv00557
Plaintiff:
Phillip Joseph Johnson
Defendant:
Randolph Wilson, Michael Gonzalez, Randy Barcena and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Amos Financial LLC v. Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation
as 1:2023cv03010
Plaintiff:
Amos Financial LLC
Defendant:
Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation
Cause Of Action: 25 U.S.C. § 640 Indian Tribal Rights
Antonio Gonzalez v. Garland
as 23-52
Petitioner:
AMOS ANTONIO GONZALEZ
Respondent:
MERRICK B. GARLAND, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL
Amos Gbeintor, et al v. Demandbase, Inc., et al
as 23-15001
Plaintiff / Appellee:
AMOS GBEINTOR, WILTON ALDERMAN and DRU DOMINCI, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated
Defendant / Appellant:
DEMANDBASE, INC. and INSIDEVIEW TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
CASE NUMBER NOT USED
as 2:2022cv01809
Plaintiff:
Roche Freedman LLP and Nathan Holcomb
Defendant:
Jason Cyrulnik
3Rd Party Defendant:
Kyle Roche, Devin Freedman, Amos Friedland and others
Gregory Brown v. Richard Morgan, et al
as 22-35884
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GREGORY TYREE BROWN
Defendant / Appellee:
RICHARD L. MORGAN, BERNARD WARNER, SCOTT FRAKES and others
Ellis v. State of Arizona et al
as 2:2022cv01480
Plaintiff:
Michael G Ellis
Defendant:
State of Arizona, JP Morgan Chase, Thomas Kelly and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Walton #037353 v. Shinn et al
as 2:2022cv01277
Plaintiff:
Geary Wayne Walton
Defendant:
David Shinn, C Amos, S Ray and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Dean Abbott et al v. Ford Motor Company
as 2:2022cv05002
Plaintiff:
Dean Abbott, Gerald Abell, Aisha Adams and others
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
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.
