District Court Cases in Alaska
Cases 1 - 10 of 8,449
Axelson v. Unum Life Insurance Company of America
as 3:2026cv00333
Plaintiff:
Renae Axelson
Defendant:
Unum Life Insurance Company of America
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Xavier v. State of Alaska
as 3:2026cv00332
Plaintiff:
Francis Paul Xavier
Defendant:
State of Alaska
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gaines v. Saechae
as 3:2026cv00331
Plaintiff:
Bernard Akreem Gaines
Defendant:
Smith M. Saechae
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Faulkner et al v. Pendergast et al
as 3:2026cv00329
Plaintiff:
Jeannine D. Faulkner and Jeannine P. Faulkner
Defendant:
Kevin Pendergast and U.S. Bureau of Land Management
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1361 Petition for Writ of Mandamus
Rubey v. Blondin et al
as 3:2026cv00330
Plaintiff:
Alexander Rubey
Defendant:
Randy Blondin and F/V Stephanie Lynn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1916
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2026cv00328
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Pappenheim v. Alaska State Medical Board et al
as 1:2026cv00018
Plaintiff:
John E. Pappenheim
Defendant:
Alaska State Medical Board, Alaska State Medical Society Physician Health Committee, Soberlink and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Washington v. Fang et al
as 3:2026cv00325
Plaintiff:
Leo Washington
Defendant:
Vanessa Fang, Jasmine LeCont Mcclanahan, Rowan Wilson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Love v. State of Alaska
as 3:2026cv00327
Petitioner:
Darold Greg Love
Respondent:
State of Alaska
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 st Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State Pre-Trial)
Ahgeak v. Sawyer
as 3:2026cv00326
Plaintiff:
Max Ungarook Ahgeak
Defendant:
Sawyer
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.
