Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Hogan v. XTO Energy
as 26-50595
Plaintiff:
Kimberly D. Hogan
Defendant:
XTO Energy Company, Randy Cleveland, XTO CEO/President and John Does 1-5
Gunter v. Exxon Mobil
as 26-20328
Plaintiff:
Kyle Gunter
Defendant:
XTO Energy, Exxon Mobil, Bryan Bollinger and others
Gray v. McLemore Heirs LLC et al
as 6:2026cv00260
Plaintiff:
Nawana Gray
Defendant:
McLemore Heirs LLC, Lacy & Crain Nominee LLC, XTO Energy Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Roger Salvatora, et al v. XTO Energy Inc
as 26-1640
Plaintiff:
ROGER A. SALVATORA, SANDRA E. SALVATORA, HEASLEYS NURSERIES INC and others
Defendant:
XTO ENERGY INC
Gunter v. XTO Energy et al
as 4:2025cv06356
Plaintiff:
Kyle Gunter
Defendant:
XTO Energy, ExxonMobil, Bryan Bollinger and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 754 Discrimination
Hogan v. XTO Energy Company et al
as 1:2025cv01959
Plaintiff:
Kimberly D. Hogan
Defendant:
XTO Energy Company, Randy Cleveland and John Does 1-5
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Fraud
Douglas Kriley, et al v. XTO Energy Inc
as 25-8035
Respondent:
DOUGLAS KRILEY, TINA KRILEY, THOMAS A. MICHEL and others
Petitioner:
XTO ENERGY INC
Fischer, et al v. XTO Energy, et al
as 25-7072
Plaintiff:
FRED A. FISCHER, ROGER A. FISCHER and CHIEFTAIN ROYALTY COMPANY
Defendant:
XTO ENERGY, INC., (including predecessors, successors, and affiliates)
Appellee:
EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION and EXXON MOBIL OIL CORPORATION
XTO Energy Inc. v. Baker et al
as 1:2025cv00209
Plaintiff:
XTO Energy Inc.
Defendant:
Roger E. Baker and Marilyn J. Baker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Imber et al v. Flywheel Energy LLC et al
as 4:2025cv00479
Plaintiff:
Annabelle Davis Clinton Imber and Annabelle Imber Tuck
Defendant:
Flywheel Energy LLC, XTO Energy Inc and Van Buren Energy LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract
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.
