Cases 1 - 10 of 141
Riley et al v. Tafoya
as 1:2024cv00384
Plaintiff:
Tyler Riley, Manuel Calvillo, Ryder Timaj Cadena-Powell and others
Defendant:
Alisha Tafoya
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Latham v. Avenue East Apartments LLC et al
as 5:2024cv00350
Plaintiff:
Charlene Y Latham
Defendant:
Avenue East Apartments LLC doing business as Alight-Stillwater, SCION Group LLC The, Phillips Murrah PC and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-7016
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Fitness Together Franchise, L.L.C. v. Tiger Ventures, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv00606
Plaintiff:
Fitness Together Franchise, L.L.C.
Defendant:
Tiger Ventures, Inc., Ballantyne Fitness Solutions, Inc., Chavanne Scott and others
White v. Lucero, et al
as 24-2035
Plaintiff:
CLIFTON WHITE
Defendant:
ALISHA TAFOYA LUCERO, New Mexico Corrections Department, in her individual capacity, JOE LYTLE, New Mexico Corrections Department, in his individual capacity, MELISSA ORTIZ, New Mexico Corrections Department, in her individual capacity and others
United States v. Bennett
as 23-1403
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
CLIFTON BRETT BENNETT
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2023cv01114
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Hite v. Social Security Administration
as 1:2023cv01017
Plaintiff:
Clifton Lee Hite
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
United States v. Clifton
as 23-3190
Plaintiff / Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellant:
JULIE CLIFTON
McDonald (PS) v. Mason et al
as 1:2023cv02316
Plaintiff:
Nicholas John McDonald
Defendant:
Grant Mason, Clifton, Carillo and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
