Cases 1 - 8 of 8
VIGIL v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv34193
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL ANTHONY VIGIL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Vigil v. Social Security Administration
as 1:2018cv00445
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Plaintiff:
Michael A. Vigil
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
In re: Michael Anthony Vigil
as 1:2016cv02746
In_re:
Michael Anthony Vigil
Defendant:
Michael Anthony Vigil , Jolene Vigil , Jessica Vigil and others
Plaintiff:
Lynn Hahn Martinez
Interested_party:
U.S. Trustee and United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0157
Vacek v. Judicial Standards Commission, et al
as 09-2226
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAN VACEK
Defendant - Appellee:
JUDICIAL STANDARDS COMMISSION, DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT, an administrative division of limited jurisdiction within the Second Judicial District Court, COURT OF APPEALS and others
Vacek v. Judicial Standards Commission of New Mexico et al
as 1:2008cv01210
Plaintiff:
Dan L Vacek
Defendant:
Judicial Standards Commission of New Mexico, DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT, Court of Appeals and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Vacek v. Court of Appeals, et al
as 08-2203
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAN VACEK
Defendant - Appellee:
BERNALILLO COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, Bernalillo County, New Mexico, DARREN WHITE, Sheriff, DARCI BLASCHKE, Captain NCIC USERNAME JOHNDOE#1BER and others
Vacek v. Court of Appeals et al
as 6:2007cv01187
Plaintiff:
Dan L Vacek
Defendant:
Court of Appeals, Michael E Vigil, Second Judicial District Court and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Vacek v. Court of Appeals et al
as 1:2007cv01187
Plaintiff:
Dan L Vacek
Defendant:
Court of Appeals, Michael E Vigil, Second Judicial District Court and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
