Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Hornof, et al v. United States, et al
as 23-1761
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAROSLAV HORNOF, a resident and citizen of the Czech Republic, DAMIR KORDIC, a resident and citizen of Croatia and LUKAS ZAK, a resident and citizen of the Slovak Republic
Defendant / Appellee:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, US COAST GUARD, US DEPT. OF HOMELAND SECURITY and others
Interested Party:
CHALOS & CO. P.C.
Defendant:
JOHN D. CASHMAN, an employee of the US Department of Justice, RICHARD UDEL, an employer of the US Department of Justice, MICHAEL A. FAZIO, Commander, First Coast Guard District of the United States Coast Guard and others
Bannon v. Godin, et al
as 22-1958
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JENNIFER ROOT BANNON, as the Special Personal Representative of the Estate of Juston Root
Defendant / Appellee:
DAVID GODIN, Boston Police Officer, JOSEPH MCMENAMY, Boston Police Officer, LEROY FERNANDES, Boston Police Officer and others
Nat'l Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Doe
as 20-1811
Plaintiff / Appellee:
NATIONAL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE CO
Defendant:
JESSICA DAVIS, d/b/a Roots of Life Midwifery
Defendant / Appellant:
JANE DOE
Libertarian Party of NH, et al v. Gardner
as 10-1360
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, BOB BARR, WAYNE A. ROOT and others
Defendant - Appellee:
WILLIAM M. GARDNER, in his official capacity as Secretary of State of New Hampshire
Interested Party:
KENNETH E. BLEVENS
Barr, et al v. Galvin
as 09-2426
Plaintiff - Appellee:
BOB BARR, WAYNE A. ROOT, LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF MASSACHUSETTS and others
Defendant - Appellant:
WILLIAM F. GALVIN, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Barr, et al v. Galvin
as 08-2419
Plaintiff - Appellee:
BOB BARR, WAYNE A. ROOT, LIBERTARIAN PARTY OF MASSACHUSETTS and others
Defendant - Appellant:
WILLIAM F. GALVIN, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
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.
