Cases 1 - 10 of 10
STEELE v. MONTES
as 2:2023cv20473
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLEY STEELE
Defendant:
ROMAN MONTES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
ANTHONY v. MONTES et al
as 2:2023cv20315
Plaintiff:
KEVIN ANTHONY
Defendant:
DIANA MONTES and RICHARD MARCOLUS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2023cv03260
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2018cv15266
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
MONTE v. KESSLING et al
as 2:2018cv11363
Defendant:
CHRISTOPHER KILLORAN, MICHAEL J. SATZ, HONORABLE LISA PORTER and others
Plaintiff:
FRANK M. MONTE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MONTE v. BOROUGH OF LAWNSIDE et al.
as 1:2017cv11986
Defendant:
BOROUGH OF LAWNSIDE , BOROUGH OF LAWNSIDE POLICE DEPARTMENT , COUNTY OF CAMDEN and others
Plaintiff:
DEVON MONTE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
TORO v. ROLAN et al
as 2:2016cv02193
Plaintiff:
YANILDA ANETTE TORO
Defendant:
VANESSA ROLAN, ROMAN MONTES, NJ SUPERIOR COURTS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
BANKS v. PIVNICHNY et al
as 1:2015cv03368
Plaintiff:
FREDERICK BANKS
Defendant:
TIMOTHY PIVNICHNY, BARACK OBAMA, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2007cv04624
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
FRANCIS et al v. STATE OF NJ OFFICE OF LAW GUARDIAN et al
as 3:2007cv03558
Plaintiff:
JANET FRANCIS, ANNETTE FRANCIS, E.N.F. and others
Defendant:
STATE OF NJ OFFICE OF LAW GUARDIAN, REBECCA MILLER, STATE OF NJ OFFICE OF PARENTAL REPRESENTATION and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
