Cases 41 - 50 of 1,235
Van Huisen v. Warner Brothers, et al.
as 24-964
Plaintiff:
GREGORY SCOTT VAN HUISEN
Defendant:
WARNER BROTHERS, Time Warner and LEONARDO DICAPRIO
Van Huisen v. United States House of Representatives, et al.
as 24-898
Plaintiff:
GREGORY SCOTT VAN HUISEN
Defendant:
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES and MIKE JOHNSON, House Speaker
Char v. Tresch, et al.
as 24-868
Plaintiff:
MARK ALAN CHAR
Defendant:
MAURA TRESCH, RICHARD BANNER, DEANE HATAKEYAMA and others
Van Huisen v. United States of America, et al.
as 24-842
Plaintiff:
GREGORY SCOTT VAN HUISEN
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PR, CLINTON ADMINISTRATION, K. BIEKER, CEO, CCC and others
Singh, et al. v. Jenal, et al.
as 24-809
Plaintiff:
VISHAL SINGH, JESSICA WOODWARD, SCOTT TAYLOR and others
Defendant:
JOHN JENAL, an individual, CITY OF LOS ANGELES, a municipal entity, JEFFREY LEWIS and others
Rogers v. United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Sacramento
as 24-805
Petitioner:
KIM EDWARD ROGERS
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, SACRAMENTO
Interested Party:
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, KEATON RILEY, Chief of State to Patrick Kennedy, JIM COOPER, Sacramento Sheriff and others
United States of America v. Scott
as 24-733
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
LUKE JOHN SCOTT, SR.
Rogers v. County of Sacramento, et al.
as 24-738
Plaintiff:
KIM EDWARD ROGERS
Defendant:
COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, KEATON RILEY, Chief of State to Patrick Kennedy, JIM COOPER, Sacramento Sheriff and others
Petrozzi v. Inslee, et al.
as 24-689
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIMOTHY ROBERT PETROZZI
Defendant / Appellee:
JAY INSLEE, GOVERNOR, RONALD LEIGHTON, JAMES FLYNN and others
Kaywanfar v. Arianpourp, et al.
as 24-699
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SHAHRAM KAYWANFAR
Defendant / Appellee:
SHAWN ARIANPOURP, SCOTT GIZER, CAMERON ARONSON 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.
