Cases 11 - 20 of 145
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv03107
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 Americans With Disabilities Act
Diane K. Godfrey v. Regents of University of California et al
as 2:2023cv02068
Plaintiff:
DIANE K. GODFREY
Defendant:
Stanford Health Care, Regents of University of California, Doctors Medical Center of Modesto Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Fraud
(PS) Rhee v. Medical Board of CA, et al
as 2:2023cv00438
Plaintiff:
Hanna Q. Rhee
Defendant:
Medical Board of California, Xavier Becerra, Kimberly Kirchmeyer and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
Paul Isaacson, et al v. Kristin Mayes, et al
as 23-15234
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:
KRISTIN K. MAYES, in her official capacity as Arizona Attorney General, ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES, JENNIFER CUNICO, o in her official capacity as 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
Intervenor:
BEN TOMA and WARREN PETERSEN
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
Scott v. Unknown Party et al
as 2:2023cv00184
Plaintiff:
Gene Edward Scott, II
Defendant:
Medical Board, Center for Disease Control and Unknown Party
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question: Bivens Act
Ohan v. American Medical Association et al
as 3:2023cv00047
Plaintiff:
Festus O. Ohan
Defendant:
American Medical Association, National Board of Medical Examiners, Federation of State Medical Board and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Ernest Bonner, Jr. v. Kimberly Kirchmeyer, et al
as 23-15212
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ERNEST L. BONNER, Jr.
Defendant / Appellee:
KIMBERLY KIRCHMEYER, CYNDIE KOUZA, CATHY L. LOZANO and others
Defendant:
MEDICAL BOARD OF CALIFORNIA, DENISE PINES, DEV CNANADEV 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
Briggs v. Fenstermaker, et al.
as 1:2023cv00140
Plaintiff:
Johnny Lee Briggs
Defendant:
David Fenstermaker, Community Regional Medical Center and Medical Board of Examiners
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil 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.
