Cases 1 - 10 of 1,175
United States v. Patricia Johnson Rushing
as 24-2188
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Patricia L. Johnson Rushing
Johnson et al v. Hennepin Healthcare System, Inc.
as 0:2024cv02129
Plaintiff:
Rachael Johnson and Reade Adams
Defendant:
Hennepin Healthcare System, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 2510 Wire or Oral Communications
Kamil Johnson v. United States
as 24-2049
Petitioner:
Kamil Hakeem Johnson
Respondent:
United States of America
Auto-Rec Bodyworks, Inc. et al v. Doe 1 et al
as 0:2024cv01474
Plaintiff:
HRE LLC, Hellmuth & Johnson, PLLC and Auto-Rec Bodyworks, Inc.
Defendant:
John Doe 1 and John Doe 2
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
North Metro Harness Initiative LLC v. Beattie et al
as 0:2024cv01369
Plaintiff:
North Metro Harness Initiative LLC doing business as Running Aces
Defendant:
Michael Beattie, Craig Beaulieu, Raymond Brenny and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
United States v. Scott Johnson
as 24-1769
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Scott Howard Johnson
United States v. Durrell Johnson
as 24-1771
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Durrell Brent Johnson, also known as Loc
Greg Hale, et al v. ARcare, Inc
as 24-1726
Plaintiff:
Greg Hale, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Melissa Johnson, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Alicia Gilmore, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated and others
Defendant:
ARcare, Inc, originally named as ARcare
United States v. Junian Johnson
as 24-1580
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Junian M. Johnson
Johnson et al v. Parson et al
as 4:2024cv00174
Plaintiff:
Barbara Johnson, Nicole Price, Narene Crosby and others
Defendant:
Michael L. Parson, Andrew Bailey, Jay Ashcroft and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
