Cases 11 - 20 of 52
(PC) Johnson v. Lusk et al
as 2:2018cv02984
Defendant:
Chatha, Solano County Sheriff Department, Lusk and others
Plaintiff:
Alfred Norman Johnson, III
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
McFarland v. Department of Veteran Affairs
as 2:2017cv07793
Defendant:
Melvin Wade, Sr., Bethel Missionary Baptist Church Inc., California Missionary State Baptist Convention and others
Plaintiff:
Anthony McFarland
The Regents of the University of California v. Federal Emergency Management Agency et al
as 3:2017cv03461
Plaintiff:
The Regents of the University of California
Defendant:
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Robert J. Fenton, Jr., Jeffrey D. Lusk and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2017cv00762
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal - Fair Credit Reporting Act
Maduena v. Goddard et al
as 2:2017cv01584
Plaintiff:
Genaro Lopez Maduena
Defendant:
Terry Goddard, L Lusk and Kelly Neal
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Dwight Stirling v. David Lusk
as 16-56199
Petitioner - Appellant:
DWIGHT D. STIRLING
Respondent - Appellee:
DAVID RICHARD LUSK
Gohranson et al v. Snohomish County et al
as 2:2016cv01124
Plaintiff:
John T. Gohranson
Defendant:
Snohomish County , Robert Trenary, Stuart Andrews M.D. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Sapien v. Chappelle et al
as 1:2016cv00910
Plaintiff:
Richard Casarez Sapien
Defendant:
Audrey Chappelle, Tobin Lucks, Stericyle, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
In re David Richard Lusk
as 8:2016cv00930
Respondent:
In re David Richard Lusk
Petitioner:
Dwight D. Stirling
Real Party In Interest Defendant:
United States of America
Lusk et al v. C R Bard Incorporated et al
as 2:2016cv00921
Plaintiff:
Beverly Lusk and Richard Lee Lusk
Defendant:
C R Bard Incorporated and Bard Peripheral Vascular Incorporated
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
