Cases 1 - 4 of 4
State of Texas v. Becerra et al
as 5:2022cv00185
Plaintiff:
State of Texas, American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians & Gynecologists and Christian Medical & Dental Associations
Defendant:
Xavier Becerra, US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and others
Amicus Curiae:
New York State, California State of, Colorado and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551 Administrative Procedure Act
Wiltfong v. California State Board of Accountancy
as 3:2017cv00355
Defendant:
California State Board of Accountancy, et al
Plaintiff:
Michael D. Wiltfong
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)
Scotia Development, et al v. The Bank of New York, et al
as 08-40746
Debtor - (null):
In the Matter of: SCOTIA PACIFIC COMPANY LLC and PACIFIC LUMBER CO
Appellant:
BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY NA, as Indenture Trustee for the Timber Notes, ANGELO GORDON & CO LP, AURELIUS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LP, AND DAVIDSON KEMPNER CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, SCOTIA PACIFIC COMPANY LLC and others
Appellee:
OFFICIAL UNSECURED CREDITORS' COMMITTEE, Official Unsecured Creditors' Committeea Appellee, MARATHON STRUCTURED FINANCE FUND LP, MENDOCINO REDWOOD COMPANY LLC and others
Amicus Curiae:
THE AMERICAN SECURITIZATION FORUM
Scotia Development, et al v. The Bank of New York, et al
as 08-27
Petitioner:
BANK OF NEW YORK TRUST COMPANY NA, as Indenture Trustee for the Timber Notes, ANGELO GORDON & CO LP, AURELIUS CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LP, AND DAVIDSON KEMPNER CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, SCOTIA PACIFIC COMPANY LLC and others
Respondent:
OFFICIAL UNSECURED CREDITORS' COMMITTEE, Official Unsecured Creditors' Committeea Appellee, UNITED STATES JUSTICE DEPARTMENT and CALIFORNIA STATE AGENCIES
Respondent - Respondent:
MARATHON STRUCTURED FINANCE FUND LP, MENDOCINO REDWOOD COMPANY LLC and PACIFIC LUMBER CO, The Pacific Lumber Company
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.
