Cases 11 - 20 of 1,715
United States of America v. Boyd (Jermaine Buchanan)
as 24-2139
Defendant:
DAVID 17 BURDEN, FRANK KNIGHT, JOSEPH DANIELS and others
:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Jeffrey Farkas, M.D., LLC v. Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield
as 1:2024cv04685
Defendant:
Empire BlueCross BlueShield and Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Farkas, M.D., LLC doing business as Interventional Neuro Associates
Cause Of Action: 09 U.S.C. § 0010 Petition to Vacate Arbitration Award
Win v. Perficient, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv04701
Defendant:
Perficient, Inc., David Lundeen, Jeffrey S. Davis and others
Plaintiff:
Michael Win
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78 m(a) Securities Exchange Act
United States of America v. Branch (Munoz)
as 24-1987
Defendant:
YACKEEM MCFARLANE, ALLEN COLON, FAHEEM TAYLOR and others
:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
United States of America v. Nordlicht
as 24-1978
Defendant:
JOSEPH SANFILIPPO, MARK NORDLICHT, URI LANDESMAN and others
:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Jeffrey Farkas, M.D., LLC v. Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield
as 2:2024cv04566
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Farkas, M.D., LLC doing business as Interventional Neuro Associates
Defendant:
Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield and Empire BlueCross BlueShield
Cause Of Action: 09 U.S.C. § 1 U.S. Arbitration Act
Grune v. Hernandez
as 24-1803
Defendant:
Cissy and HAZEL HERNANDEZ, Code Enforcement Officer
Plaintiff:
JEFFREY C. GRUNE
Stevenson v. Thornburgh
as 24-1788
Plaintiff:
GREGORY A. STEVENSON, as a Shareholder of CREDIT SUISSE GROUP AG and on behalf of CREDIT SUISSE GROUP AG shareholders
Defendant:
RICHARD E. THORNBURGH, BRADLEY W. DOUGAN, JOHN G. POPP and others
Lawtone-Bowles v. Thornburgh
as 24-1794
Plaintiff:
NICOLE LAWTONE-BOWLES, as a shareholder of CREDIT SUISSE GROUP AG and on behalf of CREDIT SUISSE GROUP AG shareholders
Defendant:
RICHARD E. THORNBURGH, BRADLEY W. DOUGAN, JOHN G. POPP and others
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.
