Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Wells v. Tucson, City of et al
as 4:2026cv00474
Plaintiff:
Paul B Wells
Defendant:
Tucson, City of, Samuel Rennick, Stephen Parker and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Filtrex S.r.l. v. Mott Corporation et al
as 3:2026cv01443
Plaintiff:
Filtrex S.r.l.
Defendant:
Mott Corporation and Asco Filtri S.p.A.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1836 (b) Civil Action to Protect Trade Secrets
Cardoza v. Mott et al
as 8:2026cv03304
Plaintiff:
GARY CARDOZA
Defendant:
DEAN MOTT and Medline Industries, LP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity Action
Mott v. Ovation Tax Group, LLC
as 2:2026cv00265
Plaintiff:
William Mott
Defendant:
Ovation Tax Group, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Telephone Consumer Protection Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2026cv02217
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Mott et al v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co.) et al
as 2:2026cv03366
Plaintiff:
Mark A Mott and Michanne Mott
Defendant:
3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co.), AGC Chemicals Americas Inc, Allstar Fire Eqiupment and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
MOTT v. DOE 1 et al
as 3:2026cv04916
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL JARARD MOTT
Defendant:
JOHN DOE 1, JOHN DOE 2, MICHAEL ALLENDER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2026cv06811
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 6:2026cv06812
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
MOTT v. USA
as 1:2026cv01101
Plaintiff:
SEAN M. MOTT
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1491 Tucker Act
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.
