Cases 1 - 10 of 17
United States of America v. $219,970.00 in United States Currency
as 1:2021cv01844
Defendant:
$219,970.00 in United States Currency
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Claimant:
Yolima A. Hartley and Kevin S. Hartley
Cause Of Action: 21 U.S.C. § 881
Giambrone et al v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
as 1:2018cv11525
Plaintiff:
Timothy K. Ginley, Robert Humphrey, Patrick Halloran and others
Defendant:
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1605 A
HARTLEY v. BERRYHILL
as 1:2017cv01043
Defendant:
NANCY A. BERRYHILL
Plaintiff:
ROY S. HARTLEY
Miscellaneou:
SSA (Court Use Only) and USM (Court Use Only)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWW)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv20683
Appellant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Appellee:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 0158
Hartley v. Boston Scientific Corporation
as 2:2016cv05571
Plaintiff:
Kathy S. Hartley
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Consenta v. Register et al
as 2:2016cv00307
Plaintiff:
Kelandus Tarvares Consenta
Defendant:
Christopher Mancel Register and S Hartley
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Hartley v. Seely et al
as 1:2015cv01345
Plaintiff:
James S. Hartley, Jr.
Defendant:
Gregory R. Seely, Robert LaBuff, Joseph Stanzione and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hartley v. Devlin et al
as 9:2014cv01366
Plaintiff:
Michael S. Hartley
Defendant:
Devlin, Alfred E. Smith, Connie Coppola and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Pena v. Hartley, et al
as 13-1278
Petitioner - Appellant:
JOSE ARTURO PENA
Respondent - Appellee:
S. HARTLEY, Warden, Arkansas Valley Correctional Facility and COLORADO ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO
Pena v. Hartley et al
as 1:2012cv01363
Petitioner:
Jose Arturo Pena
Respondent:
S. Hartley and Attorney General of the State of Colorado, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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.
