Cases 41 - 47 of 47
HHS Construction Inc v. United States of America
as 2:2011cv07239
Plaintiff:
HHS Construction Inc
Defendant:
United States of America
Palomar Medical Center v. Charles Johnson, et al
as 10-56529
Plaintiff - Appellant:
PALOMAR MEDICAL CENTER, 555 East Valley Parkway, Escondido, CA 92025
Defendant - Appellee:
CHARLES E. JOHNSON, Acting Secretary of the United States, Department of Health and Human Services, 200 Independence Avenue S.W., Washington, DC 20201 and KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, Secretary of HHS
Monica v. US Dept HUD et al
as 3:2010cv01193
Plaintiff:
Lewis, Monica
Defendant:
US Dept HUD, USPS, US Dept HHS and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 241
Amtrust Bank et al v. Lewis et al
as 2:2010cv00439
Defendant:
Alpha Vista, LLC, Bartlett Sunrise, LLC, Corrales Peters, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
Amtrust Bank, Iota Cinnamon, LLC, Iota Coral, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 1819 Default of Promissory Note
USA v. Daniel Maciel, Jr.
as 10-50097
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
DANIEL MARTIN MACIEL, Jr., AKA Pony, AKA Seal HH
Buesgens et al v. Internal Revenue Service et al
as 3:2009mc80109
Plaintiff:
Michael L. Buesgens, Arlene M. Martinez and Nancy Walraven
Defendant:
Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, Federal Occupational Health Service (FOHS) and others
David Lopez, et al v. LVMPD, et al
as 09-15721
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID LOPEZ, as the heir of Swuave Lopez, deceased, AQUANETTA HARRISAS, as the heir of Swuave Lopez, deceased, AKA Aquanetta Scranton and THE ESTATE OF SWUAVE LOPEZ, by and through Jacqueline Scranton, as Special Administrator
Defendant - Appellee:
LAS VEGAS METROPOLITAN POLICE DEPARTMENT, KEN HARDY, in his individual and official capacity and SHANE WOMACK, in his individual and official capacity
Movant:
STATE OF NEVADA, ex. rel. Nevada State Dept. of HHS, DCFS, NYTC
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.
