Cases 1 - 10 of 3,244
Huston et al v. Pimm Trucking et al
as 2:2024cv00313
Plaintiff:
Patrick Huston and Kaycee Tanner
Defendant:
Pimm Trucking and Christopher C. Davis
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 Notice of Removal- Personal Injury
Bradley v. Tritt et al
as 2:2024cv00542
Plaintiff:
Brandon Bradley, Sr
Defendant:
Kyle Tritt, Joseph Beahm, Jesse Jones and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Undzilo et al v. B. Tanner & A. McCargar, P.C. et al
as 4:2024cv00223
Plaintiff:
Jason Undzilo, Garrett Sutliff and Gabriel Zaldo
Defendant:
B. Tanner & A. McCargar, P.C. an Arizona Professional Corporation doing business as Elite Home Advisors, Anthony Boatner and Unknown Boatner
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2024cv00780
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Tanner v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02024
Plaintiff:
Charmane T. Tanner
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Sullivan v. State of Montana, et al.
as 24-2682
Plaintiff:
RYAN PATRICK SULLIVAN
Defendant:
STATE OF MONTANA, YELLOWSTONE COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY, OFFICER WOLD and others
Snedeker v. State of Colorado, et al
as 24-1173
Plaintiff:
BRADFORD WAYNE SNEDEKER, SR.
Defendant:
STATE OF COLORADO, ANJALI NANDI, DENISE MERTZ and others
232 West Mason LLC v. Jackson, City of, et al
as 5:2024cv11051
Plaintiff:
232 W MASON LLC
Defendant:
City of Jackson, a municipal corporation, Matthew Hagerty, Mark M. Porterfield and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Larch v. Prosecuting Attorney et al
as 1:2024cv00122
Plaintiff:
Tanner Moren Eagle Larch
Defendant:
Prosecuting Attorney and United States
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.
