Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2023cv00447
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Age)
Sandoval v. Peden et al
as 4:2022cv03074
Plaintiff:
Veronica Sandoval
Defendant:
Ofc. John Peden, Chief Mark Montgomery and City of Cozad
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lietzke v. City of Montgomery et al
as 4:2019cv03095
Defendant:
Kevin Murphy and City of Montgomery
Plaintiff:
Bill Lietzke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lietzke v. County of Montgomery et al
as 4:2019cv03096
Defendant:
Reese Mckinney, D.T. Marshall and County of Montgomery
Plaintiff:
Bill Lietzke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lietzke v. City of Montgomery et al
as 4:2016cv03030
Defendant:
City of Montgomery and Todd Strange
Plaintiff:
Bill Lietzke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Lietzke v. County of Montgomery, et al
as 4:2016cv03021
Defendant:
County of Montgomery, et al, D. T. Marshall and Reese Mckinney
Plaintiff:
Bill Lietzke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Montgomery v. Colvin
as 8:2015cv00318
Defendant:
Carolyn W. Colvin and Office of General Counsel Social Security Administration
Plaintiff:
Bonita Montgomery
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 205 Denial Social Security Benefits
Federal Trade Commission v. Money Now Funding, LLC et al
as 8:2013mc00072
Defendant:
Affiliate Marketing Group, LLC, Affinity Technologies, LLC, Jennifer Beckman and others
Receiver:
Peter S. Davis
Plaintiff:
Federal Trade Commission
Wiig et al v. Haseloh et al
as 4:2010cv03129
Defendant:
Richard Haseloh, Mark Montgomery and Unknown Ricely
Plaintiff:
Mary Mcintosh and Charles E. Wiig
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wiig v. Haseloh et al
as 8:2010cv00226
Defendant:
Richard Haseloh, Mark Montgomery and Ricely
Plaintiff:
Charles E. Wiig
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
