Cases filed in the Ninth Circuit Courts
Cases 11 - 20 of 35
Michael Bennett, et al v. The Islamic Republic of Iran, et al
as 13-80057
Respondent: MICHAEL BENNETT, Co-Administrators of the Estate of Marla Ann Bennett and LINDA BENNETT, as Co-Administrators of the Estate of Maria Ann Bennett
Defendant: THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN and THE IRANIAN MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND SECURITY
Not Yet Classified: FRANKLIN RESOURCES, INC., VISA, INC., BANK MELLI and others
Michael Bennett, et al v. The Islamic Republic of Iran, et al
as 13-80057
Plaintiff - Respondent: MICHAEL BENNETT, Co-Administrators of the Estate of Marla Ann Bennett and LINDA BENNETT, as Co-Administrators of the Estate of Maria Ann Bennett
Defendant: THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN and THE IRANIAN MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND SECURITY
Third-party-plaintiff - Respondent: FRANKLIN RESOURCES, INC. and VISA INC.
Third-party-defendant - Petitioner: BANK MELLI
Third-party-defendant - Respondent: ESTATE OF MEIR KAHANE, ESTATE OF JUDITH GREENBAUM, CARLOS ACOSTA and others
Bryan Pringle v. William Adams, Jr., et al
as 12-56744
Plaintiff - Appellee: BRYAN PRINGLE, an individual
Defendant - Appellant: WILLIAM ADAMS, Jr., individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, STACY FERGUSON, individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, JAIME GOMEZ, individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas and others
Jones v. Adams, et al. We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2012cv01432
Defendant: William Adams , E. Borrero , Belinda Gricewich and others
Plaintiff: Jason Earl Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Jones v. Adams et al
as 1:2012at00570
Defendant: William Adams , E. Borrero , Belinda Gricewich and others
Plaintiff: Jason Earl Jones
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Timothy Crayton v. Anthony Hedgpeth, et al
as 12-16347
Plaintiff - Appellant: TIMOTHY CRAYTON
Defendant - Appellee: ANTHONY HEDGPETH, Warden, Correctional Officer, CORRALES, Correctional Officer, K. MATHENY and others
Bryan Pringle v. William Adams, Jr., et al Featured Case We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 12-55998
Plaintiff - Appellant: BRYAN PRINGLE, an individual
Defendant - Appellee: WILLIAM ADAMS, Jr., individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, STACY FERGUSON, individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, JAIME GOMEZ, individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas and others
Adams v. Commissioner, Social Security Administration
as 6:2012cv00108
Plaintiff: William Adams
Defendant: Commissioner, Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 0405 g Review of Commissioner's Final Decision
Ebony Batts, et al v. William Adams, Jr., et al
as 12-55000
Plaintiff - Appellee: EBONY LATRICE BATTS, an individual, AKA Phoenix Phenom and MANFRED MOHR, an individual
Defendant - Appellant: WILLIAM ADAMS, Jr., all individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, ALLAN PINEDA, all individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, JAIME GOMEZ, all individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas and others
Defendant: STACY FERGUSON, all individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, UMG RECORDINGS, INC., INTERSCOPE RECORDS and others
Ebony Batts, et al v. William Adams, Jr., et al
as 11-57230
Plaintiff - Appellee: EBONY LATRICE BATTS, an individual, AKA Phoenix Phenom and MANFRED MOHR, an individual
Defendant: WILLIAM ADAMS, Jr., all individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, ALLAN PINEDA, all individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, JAIME GOMEZ, all individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas and others
Defendant - Appellant: STACY FERGUSON, all individually and collectively as the music group the Black Eyed Peas, EMI APRIL MUSIC, INC. and HEADPHONE JUNKIE PUBLISHING, LLC

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.


Why Is My Information Online?