Cases 1 - 10 of 244
FILING ERROR
as 5:2024cv00517
Plaintiff:
United States of America ex rel. Randall Molnar
Defendant:
Cadence McShane Construction Company LLC
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3730 Qui Tam False Claims Act
Fountain v. Rupert
as 24-40267
Plaintiff:
Freddie Fountain, and all others similarly situated
Defendant:
John Rupert, Warden, Coffield Unit, Brian Collier, Executive Director, Jeffrey Richardson, Assistant Warden and others
Rudder et al v. United States of America
as 5:2024cv00033
Plaintiff:
Levi Rudder and Texas ex rel. Levi Rudder
Defendant:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2674 Federal Tort Claims Act
Jefferson Parish v. Chevron
as 24-30023
Plaintiff:
Jefferson Parish
Intervenor:
Louisiana State, ex rel, Jeff Landry, Attorney General and Louisiana State, through the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Coastal Management, Thomas F. Harris, Secretary
Defendant:
Chevron USA, Incorporated
Jefferson Parish v. Chevron
as 24-30022
Plaintiff:
Jefferson Parish
Intervenor:
Louisiana State, ex rel, Jeff Landry, Attorney General and Louisiana State, through the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Coastal Management, Thomas F. Harris, Secretary
Defendant:
Chevron USA, Incorporated and Chevron USA Holdings, Incorporated, As successor in interest to Texaco, Incorporated
Plaquemines Parish v. Chevron
as 24-30028
Plaintiff:
Plaquemines Parish
Intervenor:
Louisiana State, ex rel. Jeff Landry, Attorney General and Louisiana State, through the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Coastal Management, Thomas F. Harris, Secretary
Defendant:
Chevron USA, Incorporated and Chevron USA, Incorporated, as successor in interest to Gulf Oil Corporation and the California Company
Plaquemines Parish v. Chevron
as 24-30029
Plaintiff:
Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana Department of Natural Resources and Louisiana State, ex rel, Parish of Plaquemines
Intervenor:
Louisiana State, ex rel, Jeff Landry, Attorney General
Defendant:
Chevron USA, Incorporated, Named as Successor in Interest to Chevron Oil Company, The California Company and Gulf and Oil Corp. and Chevron Pipeline Company, Named as Successor in Interest to Gulf Refining Company
Plaquemines Parish v. Chevron
as 24-30030
Plaintiff:
Plaquemines Parish
Intervenor:
Louisiana State, ex rel. Jeff Landry, Attorney General and Louisiana State, through the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Coastal Management, Thomas F. Harris, Secretary
Defendant:
Chevron USA, Incorporated, as successor in interest to the California Company and Chevron Oil Company and Chevron U.S.A. Holdings, Incorporated, as successor in interest to Texaco Incorporated
Jefferson Parish v. Chevron
as 24-30031
Plaintiff:
Jefferson Parish and Louisiana State, ex rel, Parish of Jefferson
Intervenor:
Louisiana State, through the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Coastal Management, Thomas F. Harris, Secretary and Louisiana State, ex rel, Jeff Landry, Attorney General
Defendant:
Chevron U.S.A. Holdings, Incorporated, as successor in interest to Texaco E&P Inc. and Texaco Inc., Chevron USA, Incorporated, as successor in interest to The California Company, Atlantic Richfield Company, in its own capacity and as successor in interest to Acro Oil and Gas Company-Division of Atlantic Richfield and others
Plaquemines Parish v. Chevron
as 24-30032
Plaintiff:
Plaquemines Parish and Louisiana State, ex rel, Parish of Plaquemines
Intervenor:
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, Office of Coastal Management and its Secretary, Thomas F. Harris and Louisiana State, ex rel, Jeff Landry, Attorney General
Defendant:
Chevron USA, Incorporated, in its own capacity and as successor in interest to Chevron Oil Company and the California Company, Chevron USA Holdings, Incorporated, as successor in interest to Texaco E & P, Incorporated and Texaco, Incorporated, Texas Company 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.
