Cases 11 - 20 of 20
Archer v. Brown et al
as 2:2012cv00028
Plaintiff:
Maurice Ronald Archer
Defendant:
John C. Brown, Ashley Whipple, Kimberly P. Dudik and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Horob v. United States et al
as 1:2012cv00019
Plaintiff:
Todd Kenneth Horob
Defendant:
United States and Ryan Archer
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv00057
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0157
Shirley v. Walsh Group et al
as 4:2011cv00051
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Shirley
Defendant:
Walsh Group , Walsh Construction Company , Archer Western Contractors and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Archer v. United States of America
as 2:2011cv00038
Plaintiff:
Elaine Archer
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2674
Myers v. International Malting Company, LLC et al
as 4:2010cv00009
Plaintiff:
James D. Myers
Defendant:
International Malting Company, LLC, Archer Daniels Midland Company, ADM Malting LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Archer v. Law et al
as 2:2009cv00073
Petitioner:
Maurice Ronald Archer
Respondent:
Sam Law, Mike Mahoney and Attorney General of the State of Montana
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2009cv00061
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158 Notice of Appeal re Bankruptcy Matter (BAP)
Archer v. USA
as 2:2009cv00052
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Maurice Ronald Archer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence
Ferguson v. The United States District Court et al
as 1:2009cv00070
Plaintiff:
Donald Keith Ferguson
Defendant:
The United States District Court, Jack D. Shanstrom, Patrick Duffy and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens 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.
