Cases 21 - 30 of 230
Kent Salveson v. Hal Kessler
as 22-55472
Plaintiff / Appellee:
KENT SALVESON
Defendant / Appellant:
HAL ROSS KESSLER, Esquire
William Harris v. City of Kent, et al
as 22-35346
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WILLIAM L. HARRIS
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY OF KENT, JACOB D. REED, JASON NIXON and others
Daniel Gonzalez v. Department (Bureau) of Real Estate, et al
as 22-15523
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DANIEL GONZALEZ
Defendant / Appellee:
DEPARTMENT (BUREAU) OF REAL ESTATE, A California State Agency, KYLE THOMAS JONES, TRICIA SOMMERS and others
Defendant:
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., as successor by merger to Chase Home Finance, LLC, HSBC BANK USA, N.A., as trustee for Friedman, Billings, Ramsey Group, Inc. Securitization name-FBRSI 2005-4 HSBC, HSBC MORTGAGE SERVICES, INC. and others
Shaheryar Khan v. Kent Seton, et al
as 22-55366
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SHAHERYAR KHAN
Defendant / Appellee:
KENT SETON, ADAM KRAEMER, EDWARD CHARLES FOUNDATION and others
Brandon Adams v. USDC-NVL
as 22-70060
Not Classified By Court:
In re: BRANDON G. ADAMS, CAM FERENBACH, BRENDA WEKSLER and others
Petitioner:
BRANDON G. ADAMS
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA, LAS VEGAS
Ashok Babu, et al v. Gregory Ahern, et al
as 22-15355
Plaintiff / Appellee:
ASHOK BABU, ROBERT BELL, IBRAHIM KEEGAN-HORNSBY and others
Appellant:
TYLER ABBOTT, ANTHONY AARON, ROBERT ABEYTA and others
Defendant / Appellee:
GREGORY J. AHERN, Sheriff; in his official capacity as Sheriff of the Alameda County Sheriffs Office, CAROL BURTON, in her official capacity as Interim Director of the Alameda County Behavioral Health Care Services Agency, KARYN L. TRIBBLE, in her official capacity as Director of the Alameda County Behavioral Health Care Services Agency and others
Defendant:
RAYANN KRUM, TREVOR SPINGOLA and ROBERT ABEYDA
Samuel Kent v. Darryl LaCounte, et al
as 22-70013
Petitioner:
SAMUEL JAMES KENT
Respondent:
DARRYL LACOUNTE, Director of the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, DEB HAALAND, Secretary of the United States Department of the Interior, BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS and others
Daniel Perkins, et al v. Brad Little, et al
as 21-35966
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DANIEL PERKINS
Plaintiff:
ALBERT PETE VEENSTRA III, KENT RICHARD ELLIS, CHARLES LYNN SACOLICK and others
Defendant / Appellee:
BRAD LITTLE, As Governor of the State of Idaho, in official Capacity, IDAHO STATE BOARD OF CORRECTION MEMBERS, In their official capacities, JOSH TEWALT, Director IDOC; In his official capacity and others
Albert Veenstra, III, et al v. Brad Little, et al
as 21-35927
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ALBERT PETE VEENSTRA III
Plaintiff:
KENT RICHARD ELLIS, CHARLES LYNN SACOLICK, ALLEN BRANDT and others
Defendant / Appellee:
BRAD LITTLE, As Governor of the State of Idaho, in official Capacity, IDAHO STATE BOARD OF CORRECTION MEMBERS, In their official capacities, JOSH TEWALT, Director IDOC; In his official capacity and others
Paul Isaacson, et al v. Mark Brnovich, et al
as 21-16711
Plaintiff / Appellant:
PAUL A. ISAACSON, M.D., on behalf of himself and his patients, ERIC M. REUSS, M.D., M.P.H,; on behalf of himself and his patients, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN, INC., Arizona Section and others
Defendant / Appellee:
MARK BRNOVICH, Attorney General, Attorney General of Arizona, in his official capacity, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, DON HERRINGTON, Interim Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services and others
Defendant:
MICHAEL B. WHITING, County Attorney for Apache County, in his official capacity, BRIAN M. MCINTYRE, County Attorney for Cochise County, in his official capacity, WILLIAM PATRICK RING, County Attorney for Coconino County, in his official capacity and others
Amicus Curiae:
STATE OF MISSOURI, STATE OF ALABAMA, STATE OR ARKANSAS, STATE OF GEORGIA, STATE OF KANSAS, STATE OF IDAHO, STATE OF LOUISIANA, STATE OF MISSISSIPPI, STATE OF MONTANA, STATE OF NEBRASKA, STATE OF OHIO, STATE OF OKLAHOMA, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA, STATE
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.
