Rogina v. Maas
Rogina v. Maas is a federal real property lawsuit filed on 06/29/1998 in the District Court, D. Montana. The case was terminated on 12/10/1999.
A lawsuit records allegations and procedural activity. Being named as a party does not establish liability, wrongdoing, or the merits of any claim.
- Court
- District Court, D. Montana (D. Mont.)
Official Court Website → - Assigned judge
- Jack D Shanstrom · 693 cases in index
- Docket number
- 1:98-cv-00092
- Nature of suit
- 220 Foreclosure
Actions to foreclose on a mortgage or other lien against real property. - Jurisdiction
- Diversity of citizenship
- Date filed
- 06/29/1998
- Date terminated
- 12/10/1999
741 Real Property cases in this court are indexed here.
About Real Property Lawsuits
Real property cases involve disputes over land or buildings, such as foreclosures, title and ownership disputes, condemnation, and landlord-tenant matters litigated in federal court.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Rogina v. Maas?
Rogina v. Maas is a federal real property lawsuit filed on 06/29/1998 in the District Court, D. Montana. The case was terminated on 12/10/1999. Real property cases involve disputes over land or buildings, such as foreclosures, title and ownership disputes, condemnation, and landlord-tenant matters litigated in federal court.
What type of case is this?
It is classified as “Real Property” under the federal nature-of-suit system. Real property cases involve disputes over land or buildings, such as foreclosures, title and ownership disputes, condemnation, and landlord-tenant matters litigated in federal court.
What court is the case in?
The case is in the District Court, D. Montana, docket number 1:98-cv-00092.
When was the case filed?
Rogina v. Maas was filed on 06/29/1998. It was terminated on 12/10/1999.
Other Cases Involving These Parties
Related Real Property Cases
Source: public U.S. federal court record — docket 13849730 in the CourtListener/RECAP archive (verify this docket), court docket number 1:98-cv-00092 on PACER. Court, party, date and judge fields are reproduced from that record; case-type categories, statute decoding and all aggregate figures are derived by Docket Nexus (methodology).