Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Oliver v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 3:2024cv05329
Plaintiff:
James Oliver
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Interested Party:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (DIWC)
(SS) Nail v. Commissioner of Social Security
as 1:2023cv01107
Plaintiff:
James Oliver Nail
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 402 Social Security Benefits
Rune Kraft v. Chevron Corporation, et al
as 22-16087
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RUNE KRAFT
Defendant / Appellee:
CHEVRON CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, VALLEY PACIFIC PETROLEUM SYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation, VALLEY PACIFIC PETROLEUM SERVICES, INC., a California corporation and others
Kraft v. Chevron Corporation et al
as 2:2021cv00575
Defendant:
International Credit Recovery Incorporated, Valley Pacific Petroleum Systems Incorporated, Chevron Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
Rune Kraft
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961
Travon Edward Johnson v. Vincent James Oliver et al
as 2:2016cv09634
Plaintiff:
Travon Edward Johnson
Defendant:
Vincent James Oliver and Wes Robinson
Johnson v. Oliver et al
as 2:2016cv02908
Plaintiff:
Travon Edward Johnson
Defendant:
Vincent James Oliver and Wes Robinson
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Romine v. Unknown Party et al
as 2:2016cv03092
Plaintiff:
James Oliver Romine, Jr.
Defendant:
Unknown Party and Unknown Parties
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Wiley Gill v. California Attorney General et al
as 2:2016cv02383
Defendant:
Melvin Barney, Melvin Barney, Mr. Lee Baroni and others
Plaintiff:
Wiley Gill, Jr.
Romine v. Stanton
as 2:2016cv00604
Plaintiff:
James Oliver Romine, Jr.
Defendant:
James Nicholas Stanton
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
James Oliver v. Carmax Auto Superstores West Coast Inc
as 5:2015cv02283
Defendant:
Carmax Auto Superstores West Coast Inc
Plaintiff:
James Oliver
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.
