Cases 11 - 20 of 152
Bray v. State of Oregon et al
as 3:2023cv00631
Plaintiff:
Thomas Harry Bray
Defendant:
State of Oregon, D.O. M. Patton, Dr Gulick and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hartley v. Bright et al
as 5:2023cv00767
Plaintiff:
Roger Andrew Hartley
Defendant:
D.O. D. Bright, M.D. Joseph Bick, K. Kumar and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Thomas Mooney v. Douglas Fife, et al
as 23-15158
Plaintiff / Appellant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; STATE OF NEVADA, EX REL. THOMAS MOONEY
Defendant / Appellee:
DOUGLAS FIFE, M.D., HEATHER FIFE and FIFE DERMATOLOGY, PC, DBA Surgical Dermatology & Laser Center, DBA Vivida Dermatology
Defendant:
ALAN ARNOLD, M.D., VICTORIA FARLEY, M.D., ELIZABETH LANGFORD, D.O. and others
Michael Couris, et al v. Kristina Lawson, et al
as 23-55069
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL COURIS and MICHAEL FITZGIBBONS
Defendant / Appellee:
KRISTINA D. LAWSON, in her official capacity as President of the Medical Board of California, WILLIAM J. PRASIFKA, in his official capacity as Executive Director of the Medical Board of California and ROB BONTA, in his official capacity as Attorney General of California
Intervenor:
LETRINH HOANG, D.O., PHYSICIANS FOR INFORMED CONSENT, a not for-profit organization and CHILDREN'S HEALTH DEFENSE, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER, a California Nonprofit Corporation
Amicus Curiae:
INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE, COMPASSION & CHOICES, ACLU FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA and others
Mark McDonald, et al v. Kristina Lawson, et al
as 22-56220
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MARK MCDONALD and JEFF BARKE
Defendant / Appellee:
KRISTINA D. LAWSON, in her official capacity as President of the Medical Board of California, RANDY W. HAWKINS, in his official capacity as Vice President of the Medical Board of California, LAURIE ROSE LUBIANO, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Medical Board of California and others
Intervenor:
LETRINH HOANG, D.O., PHYSICIANS FOR INFORMED CONSENT, a not for-profit organization and CHILDREN'S HEALTH DEFENSE, CALIFORNIA CHAPTER, a California Nonprofit Corporation
Amicus Curiae:
INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE, COMPASSION & CHOICES, ACLU FOUNDATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA and others
Reid v. State of Montana et al
as 9:2022cv00176
Plaintiff:
Shaylynn Reid
Defendant:
State of Montana, Don Bell, Lake County Jail and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Michael Ward, et al v. Bennie Thompson, et al
as 22-16473
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MICHAEL P. WARD, Dr., D.O., husband, KELLI WARD, Dr., D.O., wife and MOLE MEDICAL SERVICES PC, an Arizona Professional Corporation
Defendant / Appellee:
BENNIE G. THOMPSON, in his official capacity as Chairman of the House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol, SELECT COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE THE JANUARY 6TH ATTACK ON THE UNITED STATES CAPITOL, a committee of the United States House of Representatives and T-MOBILE USA, INC., a Delaware Corporation
Thomas Mooney v. Douglas Fife, et al
as 22-16328
Plaintiff / Appellant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; STATE OF NEVADA, EX REL. THOMAS MOONEY
Defendant / Appellee:
DOUGLAS FIFE, M.D., HEATHER FIFE and FIFE DERMATOLOGY, PC, DBA Surgical Dermatology & Laser Center, DBA Vivida Dermatology
Defendant:
ALAN ARNOLD, M.D., VICTORIA FARLEY, M.D., ELIZABETH LANGFORD, D.O. and others
Malcolm Johnson, et al v. Kate Brown, et al
as 22-35624
Plaintiff / Appellant:
MALCOLM JOHNSON, STEPHANIE KAISER, JESSIE CLARK and others
Defendant / Appellee:
KATE BROWN, in her official capacity as Governor of the State of Oregon and PATRICK ALLEN, in his official capacity as Director of the Oregon Health Authority
Vanloan et al v. The Nation of Islam et al
as 3:2022cv00787
Plaintiff:
Jonathan Vanloan
Defendant:
The Nation of Islam, Louis Farrafhan, Tony Muhammad and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 cv Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
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.
