Cases 1 - 10 of 22
Karen Ellingstad, et al v. Kake Tribal Corporation, et al
as 22-35768
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KAREN E. ELLINGSTAD and CLIFFORD W. TAGABAN
Appellant:
FRED W. TRIEM, Counsel for Plaintiffs
Defendant / Appellee:
KAKE TRIBAL CORPORATION, JEFFREY W. HILLS, ROBERT D. MILLS and others
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. BARTLETT
Karen Ellingstad, et al v. Kake Tribal Corporation, et al
as 22-35569
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KAREN E. ELLINGSTAD and CLIFFORD W. TAGABAN
Defendant / Appellee:
KAKE TRIBAL CORPORATION, JEFFREY W. HILLS, ROBERT D. MILLS and others
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. BARTLETT
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2022cv04777
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act
Peter Adams v. Kake Tribal Corporation, et al
as 22-35134
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PETER ADAMS
Defendant / Appellee:
KAKE TRIBAL CORPORATION, JEFFREY W. HILLS and ROBERT D. MILLS
Ellingstad et al v. Kake Tribal Corporation et al
as 1:2021cv00008
Defendant:
Michael J. Bartlett, Jeffrey W. Hills, Ellie Jackson and others
Plaintiff:
Karen E. Ellingstad and Clifford W. Tagaban
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Adams v. Kake Tribal Corporation et al
as 1:2020cv00009
Defendant:
Kake Tribal Corporation, Jeffrey W. Hills and Robert D. Mills
Plaintiff:
Peter Adams
Mills v. People of the State of California
as 2:2014cv02638
Petitioner:
Frank D. Mills, Sr.
Respondent:
People of the State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Mills v. Bankers Life and Casualty Company
as 2:2014cv02322
Plaintiff:
Lambert D. Mills
Defendant:
Bankers Life and Casualty Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Bobby Charlton v. Oregon Department of Correctio, et al
as 14-35450
Plaintiff - Appellant:
BOBBY SHANE CHARLTON
Defendant - Appellee:
OREGON DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, LYTLE, Dr., Doctor at TRCI, D. MILLS, Super at TRCI and others
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.