Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Jones et al v. Federal National Mortgage Association et al
as 6:2018cv01269
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth J. Jones and Lonnie E. Jones
Defendant:
Federal National Mortgage Association and CitiMortgage, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 2605
Taylor v. Ridley et al
as 2:2018cv00314
Defendant:
Owen Bell, Eric Bowman, William Cochell and others
Plaintiff:
George Taylor
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Haaby v. Mosman et al
as 3:2017cv00629
Defendant:
D Charles Bailey, NFN Bailey, Bob Hermann and others
Plaintiff:
Darrick Shane Haaby
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Adam E. Jones
as 3:2016ad00153
In Re:
Adam E. Jones
Cause Of Action: 00 U.S.C. § 0000 Cause Code Unknown
French v. Mosum et al
as 2:2016cv00669
Defendant:
Judge Ann Aiken, Robert E. Jones and Judge Michael Mosum
Plaintiff:
Tony French
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Providence Health Plan v. Jones et al
as 3:2015cv01334
Defendant:
John Does 1 through 15 and Philip E. Jones
Plaintiff:
Providence Health Plan
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Cabello v. Jones et al
as 3:2012cv02259
Defendant:
Whitney P. Boise, Columbia County, Thomas H. Edmonds and others
Plaintiff:
Archie Cabello
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jones v. Backes et al
as 3:2012cv00341
Defendant:
Ron Backes, Pat Barbour, Deborah Elliott and others
Plaintiff:
Harlen Lee Jones
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Kelly v. Abel et al
as 3:2011cv01178
Defendant:
Gregory E. Abel, Wedge Abels, Shane E. Abma and others
503) 296-5762 (fax:
Roberta Kelly
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Langley et al v. Jones et al
as 2:2011cv00774
Defendant:
Shirley E. Jones and Charlee A. Phillips, Jr.
Plaintiff:
Ivan B. Langley and Karlee E. Langley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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.
