Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Snyder v. State of Nevada, et al.
as 26-2798
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND MAX SNYDER
Defendant:
STATE OF NEVADA, Judge KRISTON N. HILL, ROBERT E. ESTES and others
McMahan et al v. Howell et al
as 3:2025cv00119
Plaintiff:
Patricia Ann McMahan, Billy Joe McMahan and Hannah Janae Hill
Defendant:
Matthew Michael Howell and City of Clinton, TN
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 25-4022
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Snyder v. Sixth Judicial District of Utah, et al
as 24-4010
Plaintiff:
RAYMOND MAX SNYDER
Defendant:
SIXTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF UTAH, ROBERT P. FAUST and MATTHEW R. HOWELL
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2022cv00070
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Employment)
HOWELL v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv39355
Defendant:
3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW R HOWELL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Senitta Jr v. Ford Motor Company
as 1:2019cv24807
Plaintiff:
Frederick Fake, Theresa Ouellette, Michael Bargmann and others
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Senitta Jr v. Ford Motor Company
as 7:2019cv09188
Defendant:
Ford Motor Company
Plaintiff:
Michael Senitta Jr, Frederick Fake, Theresa Ouellette and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
Howell v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration
as 1:2018cv03929
Defendant:
Commissioner, Social Security Administration
Plaintiff:
Matthew Alexander Howell
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
Michael Geisler, et al v. FedEx Ground Package Systems,
as 15-10732
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL S. GEISLER, MATTHEW E. HOWELL, M. GEISLER, INC. and others
Defendant - Appellee:
FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEMS, INC.
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.
