Cases filed in the Ninth Circuit Courts
Cases 41 - 50 of 412
City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin v. McKinsey & Company, Inc. et al
as 3:2022cv06590
Plaintiff: City of Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Defendant: McKinsey & Company, Inc., McKinsey & Company, Inc. United States, McKinsey & Company, Inc. Washington D.C. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
St. Croix Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin v. McKinsey & Company, Inc.
as 3:2022cv05640
Plaintiff: St. Croix Chippewa Indians of Wisconsin
Defendant: McKinsey & Company, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Takahashi-Mendoza v. Cooperative Regions of Organic Producer Pools
as 4:2022cv05086
Plaintiff: Amber Takahashi-Mendoza
Defendant: Cooperative Regions of Organic Producer Pools doing business as Organic Valley and Cooperative Regions of Organic Producer Pools a Wisconsin Corporation doing business as Organic Valley
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
In re: Washington Cattlemen's Association, et al v. USDC-CAOAK
as 22-70194
Not Classified By Court: In re: WASHINGTON CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCAITION, PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION, STATE OF ALABAMA and others
Petitioner: AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, AMERICAN FOREST RESOURCE COUNCIL, AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE and others
Respondent: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, OAKLAND
Umar v. Schuchart et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 4:2022cv00385
Plaintiff: Muhammad-Misbah Umar
Defendant: Lee Schuchart, Tara Adolph, Olivia Ann Morzenti and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
In re: TEC Equipment, Inc. v. USDC-CALA
as 22-70174
Not Classified By Court: In re: TEC EQUIPMENT, INC., WAYNE A. WILLIAMS, NICOLE WILLIAMS, a minor and others
Petitioner: TEC EQUIPMENT, INC.
Respondent: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
State of California, et al v. Debra Haaland, et al
as 22-16094
Plaintiff / Appellee: STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, STATE OF MARYLAND and others
Defendant / Appellee: DEBRA ANNE HAALAND, U.S. Secretary of the Interior, UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, GINA RAIMONDO, U.S. Secretary of Commerce and others
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant: STATE OF ALABAMA, STATE OF ALASKA, STATE OF ARIZONA, ex rel. the Arizona Game and Fish Commission and others
State of California, et al v. Debra Haaland, et al
as 22-16095
Plaintiff / Appellee: STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, STATE OF MARYLAND and others
Defendant / Appellee: DEBRA ANNE HAALAND, U.S. Secretary of the Interior, UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, GINA RAIMONDO, U.S. Secretary of Commerce and others
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant: WASHINGTON CATTLEMEN'S ASSOCIATION, PACIFIC LEGAL FOUNDATION, STATE OF ALABAMA and others
State of California, et al v. Debra Haaland, et al
as 22-16096
Plaintiff / Appellee: STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS, STATE OF MARYLAND and others
Defendant / Appellee: DEBRA ANNE HAALAND, U.S. Secretary of the Interior, UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE, GINA RAIMONDO, U.S. Secretary of Commerce and others
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant: AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION, AMERICAN FOREST RESOURCE COUNCIL, AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE and others
Construction Laborers Trust Funds For Southern California Administrative Company v. Ameri-Core Concrete Sawing, Inc. et al
as 5:2022cv00977
Plaintiff: Construction Laborers Trust Funds For Southern California Administrative Company, a Delaware limited liability company, c/o Peter A. Hutchinson, Esq., REICH, ADELL & CVITAN, a PLC, 3550 Wilshire Blvd. and Construction Laborers Trust Funds For Southern California Administrative Company
Defendant: Ameri-Core Concrete Sawing, Inc., David John Dumas, an individual, Business Alliance Insurance Company and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.

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?