Cases 21 - 30 of 35
Catskill Mountains Chapter of v. United States Environmental Pr
as 14-2016
Plaintiff:
Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc., Theodore Gordon Flyfishers, Inc., Catskill-Deleware Natural Water Alliance, Inc. and others
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Government of the Province of Manitoba, Canada
Defendant:
State of Texas, State of Alaska, State of Idaho and others
Defendant - Appellee:
States of Colorado, New Mexico, et al., Central Arizona Water Conservation District, City and County of San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and others
Defendant - Appellant:
South Florida Water Management District
Catskill Mountains Chapter of v. United States Environmental Pr
as 14-1909
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc., Theodore Gordon Flyfishers, Inc., Catskill-Deleware Natural Water Alliance, Inc. and others
Defendant:
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Stephen L. Johnson, in his official capacity as ADMINISTRATOR OF THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, City of New York and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Central Arizona Water Conservation District, City and County of Denver, by and through its Board of Water Commissioners, Central Utah Water Conservancy District and others
Catskill Mountains Chapter of v. United States Environmental Pr
as 14-1823
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Catskill Mountains Chapter of Trout Unlimited, Inc., Theodore Gordon Flyfishers, Inc., Catskill-Deleware Natural Water Alliance, Inc. and others
Defendant:
State of Texas, State of Alaska, State of Idaho and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Stephen L. Johnson, in his official capacity as Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency and South Florida Water Management District
Defendant - Appellant-Cross-Appellee:
States of Colorado, New Mexico, et al., Central Arizona Water Conservation District, City and County of San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and others
Indian Harbor Insurance Compan v. The City of San Diego
as 13-4258
Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant - Appellee:
Indian Harbor Insurance Company
Defendant-Counter-Claimant:
The City of San Diego
Intervenor - Appellant:
California State Association of Counties Excess Insurance Authority
Indian Harbor Insurance Compan v. CSAC Excess Insurance Authorit
as 13-4261
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Indian Harbor Insurance Company
Defendant:
Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania
Defendant - Appellant:
CSAC Excess Insurance Authority, AKA California State Association of Counties Excess Insurance Authority
Indian Harbor Insurance Compan v. CSAC Excess Insurance Authorit
as 13-4324
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Indian Harbor Insurance Company
Defendant:
CSAC Excess Insurance Authority and Insurance Company of the State of Pennsylvania
Defendant - Appellant:
California State Association of Counties Excess Insurance Authority
Indian Harbor Insurance Compan v. The City of San Diego
as 13-4244
Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant - Appellee:
Indian Harbor Insurance Company
Defendant-Counter-Claimant - Appellant:
The City of San Diego
Intervenor - Appellant:
California State Association of Counties Excess Insurance Authority
Levy v. California State Library et al
as 1:2013cv02098
Plaintiff:
Amanda U. Levy
Defendant:
California State Library and State of California
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Account Receivable
Accident Fund Insurance Company of America et al v. Coyle et al
as 1:2010cv04539
Plaintiff:
The Trustees of Boston College, The Kroger Co. Master Retirement Trust, PSEG Master Retirement Trust and others
Defendant:
Dennis P. Coyle, Leslie J. Gelber, Pete J. Metros and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77
Purisima v. Commissioner of Social Security et al
as 1:2013cv01068
Plaintiff:
Anton Purisima
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security, CRST, Inc., Midlands Claim Administrators, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Rev. of Final Dec. of Sec. of HEW re: S.S. Benefits
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.
