Cases filed in the Ninth Circuit Courts
Cases 61 - 70 of 75
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2012cv00052
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
David Oster, et al v. Will Lightbourne, et al
as 12-15366
Plaintiff - Appellee: DAVID OSTER, WILLIE BEATRICE SHEPPARD, V.L., by and through his guardian litem Nancy Lagahid and others
Defendant - Appellant: WILL LIGHTBOURNE, Director of California Department of Social Sevices, TOBY DOUGLAS, Director of the California Department of Health Care Services, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES and others
Dimitre v. AFSCME District Council 57 et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2010cv01194
Defendant: AFSCME District Council 57
Plaintiff: Thomas Dimitre
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185
Coleman, et al v. Schwarzenegger, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:1990cv00520
Plaintiff: Ralph Coleman , Winifred Williams , David J Heroux and others
Defendant: John S Zil, MD , Nadim Khoury , Joseph Sandoval and others
Intervenor: USA, - California Correctional Peace Officers Association , County of Santa Clara and others
Pecial_master: Matthew A Lopes, Jr
Receiver: Robert Sillen and J. Clark Kelso
Intervenor_plaintiff: Robert Hecker
Amicu: AFSCME Local 2620 , Psychology Shield , California Psychiatric Association and others
Intervenor_defendant: Anthony Adams , Joel Anderson , Tom Berryhill and others
Movant: Patrick Wilson and Christopher T Burns
Unknown: Elwood Lui , Peter - Siggins and Sherie Lemire
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Santa Clara County Probation Peace Officers' Union et al v. County of Santa Clara We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 5:2009cv06066
Plaintiff: Santa Clara County Probation Peace Officers' Union, Santa Clara County Probation Peace Officers' Union, AFSCME Local 1587 and others
Defendant: County of Santa Clara and Sheila Mitchell
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
David Oster, et al v. John Wagner, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 09-17581
Plaintiff - Appellee: DAVID OSTER, WILLIE BEATRICE SHEPPARD, V.L., by and through his guardian litem Nancy Lagahid and others
Defendant - Appellant: JOHN WAGNER, Director of the California Department of Social Services, DAVID MAXWELL-JOLLY, Director of the California Department of Health Care Services, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CARE SERVICES and others
Amicus Curiae: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Amicus Curiae - Pending: AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF RETIRED PERSONS, COMMUNITIES ACTIVELY LIVING INDEPENDENT & FREE, CALIFORNIA STATE ORGANIZATION OF THE NATIONAL ALLIANCE ON MENTAL ILLNESS and others
ASEA/AFSCME Local 52 Health Be, et al v. Janice Johnson
as 09-17420
: In re: BEXTRA AND CELEBREX MARKETING SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellee: ASEA/AFSCME LOCAL 52 HEALTH BENEFITS TRUST
Objector - Appellant: JANICE JOHNSON and WILMA THOMPSON
Defendant - Appellee: PFIZER, INC.
ASEA/AFSCME Local 52 Health Be, et al v. Barbara Hurst
as 09-17284
: In re: BEXTRA AND CELEBREX MARKETING SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellee: ASEA/AFSCME LOCAL 52 HEALTH BENEFITS TRUST
Objector - Appellant: BARBARA HURST and DIANE GIBSON
Defendant - Appellee: PFIZER, INC.
V. et al v. Wagner et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 4:2009cv04668
Plaintiff: David Oster, David Oster, David Oster and others
Defendant: John Wagner, John Wagner, John Wagner and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0794 Job Discrimination (Handicap)
Type: Civil Rights None
V. et al v. Wagner et al
as 3:2009cv04668
Plaintiff: David Oster, David Oster, David Oster and others
Defendant: John Wagner, David Maxwell-Jolly, California Department of Health Care Services and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0794 Job Discrimination (Handicap)
Type: Civil Rights None

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?