Cases 1 - 10 of 36
Darden v. C.M.S. et al
as 3:2023cv00153
Plaintiff:
Dustin Thomas House Darden
Defendant:
C.M.S., Jeff Nelson, Randy Scott and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 241 Conspiracy Against Citizen Rights
Mehu v. WDAY et al
as 3:2023cv00099
Plaintiff:
Marlon Mozart Mehu
Defendant:
WDAY doing business as Forum Communications Company, Jeff Nelson, Drew Trafton and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
Avery #577407 v. Nelson et al
as 1:2023cv00160
Plaintiff:
Nathan Lee Avery #577407
Defendant:
Jeff Nelson and Unknown Weiber
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Nelson v. City of Fairfield Police Dept.
as 2:2022cv01619
Plaintiff:
Jeff Nelson
Defendant:
City of Fairfield Police Department
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Nelson v. City of Fairfield et al
as 2:2022at00024
Plaintiff:
Jeff Nelson
Defendant:
City of Fairfield and DOES 1-25
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Todd Roberts v. Springfield Utility Board, et al
as 21-36052
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TODD ROBERTS
Defendant / Appellee:
SPRINGFIELD UTILITY BOARD, a Public Body, JEFF NELSON, in his individual capacity, BOB FONDREN, in his individual capacity and others
NELSON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv43093
Plaintiff:
JEFF NELSON
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Allen v. Nelson et al
as 2:2021cv01097
Plaintiff:
Joseph Allen
Defendant:
Jeff Nelson, City of Auburn and auburn police department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
CASE NUMBER NOT USED
as 2:2021cv01096
Plaintiff:
Auburn City Police Department and Joseph Allen
Defendant:
Jeff Nelson and Auburn City of
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Vanderpool v. Rolf et al
as 5:2020cv06120
Plaintiff:
James Dean Vanderpool
Defendant:
Jeff Nelson, Dennis Rolf and Allen Braug
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
