Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Macklin v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al
as 5:2020cv00379
Respondent:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Warden Quintana, Lieutenant Barker and others
Petitioner:
Otis James Macklin
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Nagel v. Otis Elevator Company et al
as 2:2020cv00039
Defendant:
Otis Elevator Company and Mark S. Beer
Plaintiff:
Jack L. Nagel, Jr.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
USA v. Nantz et al
as 6:2017cv00332
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
Otis Nantz, Winnie Nantz, Capital One Bank and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
Warndorf v. Otis Elevator Company et al
as 2:2017cv00159
Plaintiff:
Diane Warndorf
Defendant:
Otis Elevator Company and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Otis v. Union Security Insurance Company
as 5:2016cv00268
Plaintiff:
Theresa Otis
Defendant:
Union Security Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
United States of America v. Otis et al
as 5:2011cv00243
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Richard Otis, Unknown Surviving Spouse of Gwen Otis , Unknown Spouse Of Richard Otis and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
USA v. Kennedy et al
as 6:2010cv00309
Plaintiff:
USA
Defendant:
Otis Kennedy, Beatrice Kennedy, The Unknown Spouse of Beatrice Kennedy and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 7:2009cv00102
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
BYRD v. U.S. PAROLE COMMISSION et al
as 7:2008cv00029
Plaintiff:
SAMUEL L. BYRD, JR.
Defendant:
U.S. Parole Commission, Edward F. Reilly, Jr., OTIS THOMAS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Goetz v. Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corporation et al
as 2:2007cv00117
Plaintiff:
Brian Goetz
Defendant:
Thyssenkrupp Elevator Corporation and Otis Elevator Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
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.
