Cases 31 - 40 of 44
Global Naps, Inc. v. Gangi
as 10-1962
Plaintiff:
GLOBAL NAPS, INC.
Movant - Appellant:
JOSHUA JUSTICE-POPE
Defendant - Appellee:
FRANK T. GANGI
Defendant:
MA DEPT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS & ENERGY, PAUL B. VASINGTON, in his capacity as Commissioner, JAMES CONNELLY, in his capacity as Commissioner and others
:
, , and others
EATON v. MOCEUS et al
as 1:2010cv00274
Plaintiff:
RICHARD S EATON
Defendant:
ELAINE MOCEUS and AGRICULTURE, US DEPT
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, MAINE DEPT v. HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, US DEPT et al
as 1:2010cv00077
Plaintiff:
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, MAINE DEPT
Defendant:
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, US DEPT, CENTERS FOR MEDICARE AND MEDICAID SERVICES, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, US SECRETARY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1395 HHS: Adverse Reimbursement Review
Carlberg, Jr. v. NH Dept of Safety, et al
as 09-2454
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WILLIAM CAREY CARLBERG, JR.
Defendant - Appellee:
NH DEPT OF SAFETY, JOHN J. BARTHELMES, in his individual and official capacities as Commissioner, NH Department of Safety, KELLY AYOTTE, in her official capacity as NH Attorney General and others
M. et al v. KING PHILIP REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT et al
as 1:2009cv10565
Plaintiff:
SEBASTIAN M., Lisa M. and Michael M.
Defendant:
KING PHILIP REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT and MASS DEPT OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Global Naps, Inc. v. Verizon New England, Inc., et al
as 09-1309
Plaintiff:
GLOBAL NAPS, INC.
Defendant - Appellee:
VERIZON NEW ENGLAND, doing business as Verizon Massachusetts
Defendant:
MA DEPT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS & ENERGY, PAUL B. VASINGTON, in his capacity as Commissioner, JAMES CONNELLY, in his capacity as Commissioner and others
Third Party Defendant - Appellant:
FRANK T. GANGI
Third Party Defendant:
GLOBAL NAPS NEW HAMPSHIRE, INC., GLOBAL NAPS REALTY, INC., CHESAPEAKE INVESTMENT SERVICES, INC. and others
:
, , and others
Global Naps, Inc., et al v. MA Dept of Telecommunications, et al
as 09-1308
Plaintiff - Appellant:
GLOBAL NAPS, INC.
Defendant:
MA DEPT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS & ENERGY, PAUL B. VASINGTON, in his capacity as Commissioner, JAMES CONNELLY, in his capacity as Commissioner and others
Defendant - Appellee:
VERIZON NEW ENGLAND, doing business as Verizon Massachusetts
Third Party Defendant - Appellant:
GLOBAL NAPS NEW HAMPSHIRE, INC., GLOBAL NAPS REALTY, INC., GLOBAL NAPS NETWORKS, INC. and others
Third Party Defendant:
1120 HANCOCK STREET, INC., FRANK T. GANGI, 321 HEATH STREET REALTY TRUST and others
Interested Party - Amicus Curiae:
PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
:
, , and others
Global Naps, Inc., et al v. Verizon New England, Inc., et al
as 09-1042
Plaintiff - Appellant:
GLOBAL NAPS, INC.
Defendant:
MA DEPT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS & ENERGY, PAUL B. VASINGTON, in his capacity as Commissioner, JAMES CONNELLY, in his capacity as Commissioner and others
Defendant - Appellee:
VERIZON NEW ENGLAND, doing business as Verizon Massachusetts
Third Party Defendant - Appellant:
GLOBAL NAPS NEW HAMPSHIRE, INC., GLOBAL NAPS REALTY, INC., GLOBAL NAPS NETWORKS, INC. and others
Third Party Defendant:
1120 HANCOCK STREET, INC., FRANK T. GANGI, 321 HEATH STREET REALTY TRUST and others
:
, , and others
Global Naps, Inc. v. Verizon New England, Inc., et al
as 09-1041
Plaintiff:
GLOBAL NAPS, INC.
Defendant - Appellee:
VERIZON NEW ENGLAND, doing business as Verizon Massachusetts
Defendant:
MA DEPT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS & ENERGY, PAUL B. VASINGTON, in his capacity as Commissioner, JAMES CONNELLY, in his capacity as Commissioner and others
Third Party Defendant - Appellant:
FRANK T. GANGI
Third Party Defendant:
GLOBAL NAPS NEW HAMPSHIRE, INC., GLOBAL NAPS REALTY, INC., CHESAPEAKE INVESTMENT SERVICES, INC. and others
:
, , and others
Gadson v. U.S. Dept of Commerce
as 1:2008cv10571
Plaintiff:
Robert V. Gadson
Defendant:
U.S. Dept of Commerce
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
