Cases 1 - 10 of 11
v. $4,698,514.00 in United States Currency et al
as 8:2024cv00160
Defendant:
$4,698,514.00 in United States Currency, $2,033,094.98 in United States Currency, $630,680.00 in United States Currency and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 Complaint for Forfeiture
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2023cv03107
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc. v. Day
as 8:2021cv00147
Defendant:
Christopher A Day
Plaintiff:
HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc.
Interested Party:
Applied Specialty Underwriters, LLC
Day v. Renny et al
as 8:2020cv00104
Defendant:
National Car Cure LLC, Gustav Renny, Matrix Financial Services, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Nathen Day
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0251
Day v. Gutterbrush LLC
as 8:2019cv00385
Plaintiff:
Nathen Day
Defendant:
Gutterbrush LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0251
Petersen v. Overstreet et al
as 8:2019cv00316
Plaintiff:
David P. Peterson
Defendant:
Adam W. Overstreet, William Ryan Kennedy, Kristina Wake and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Huot v. Montana State Department of Child and Family Services et al
as 8:2017cv00258
Defendant:
Cal Boyal, Susanne M. Clague, Susan Day and others
Plaintiff:
Safron Huot
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2014cv00161
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
Abram v. Day
as 4:2014cv03119
Plaintiff:
Eddie E. Abram
Defendant:
Day
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nesenchuk v. Day & Night Carriers, LTD. et al
as 4:2014cv03082
Defendant:
Shoaib Akhtar, All New, Inc., Day & Night Carriers and others
Plaintiff:
David Nesenchuk
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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.
