Other Statutes Cases
Cases 41 - 50 of 279
JD Bols, et al v. Gavin Newsom, et al
as 22-56006
Plaintiff / Appellant: JD BOLS and AMY MULLINS-BOYCHAK
Defendant: GAVIN NEWSOM, in his official capacity as Governor of California, TOMAS ARAGON, M.D., Dr. P.H., in his official capacities as the Director of the California Department of Public Health and State Public Health Officer, WILMA J. WOOTEN, M.D. M.P.H.in her official capacity as Medical Officer for the County of San Diego and others
Defendant / Appellee: TODD GLORIA, In his official capacity as Mayor of San Diego
Hunter et al v. Page County, Iowa et al
as 1:2022cv00017
Plaintiff: James Hunter, Sheri Hunter, Bradley Hutchison and others
Defendant: Page County, Iowa, Board of Supervisors of Page County, Iowa, Alan Armstrong and others
Intervenor: Shenandoah Hills Wind Project, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2403 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)
City of Danville, Virginia et al v. McKinsey and Company, Inc.
as 4:2022cv00118
Plaintiff: City of Danville, Virginia, Scott County Board of Supervisors and Wise County Board of Supervisors
Defendant: McKinsey and Company, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Board of Supervisors of Issaquena County v. US
as 22-2026
Plaintiff / Appellant: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ISSAQUENA COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI
Defendant / Appellee: UNITED STATES
Vertical Bridge Development LLC et al v. Maricopa, County of et al
as 2:2022cv01009
Plaintiff: Vertical Bridge Development LLC, Clear Blue Services LLC and Gary Cassel
Defendant: Maricopa, County of and Maricopa County Board of Supervisors
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
Huguette Nicole Young v. Eric Garcetti et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2022cv01602
Plaintiff: Huguette Nicole Young
Defendant: Eric Garcetti, Mike Feuer, Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Kimball-Griffith, L.P v. Brenda Burman, et al
as 21-56358
Not Classified By Court: In re: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA V. 6.03 ACRES OF LAND IN THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL
Plaintiff / Appellant: KIMBALL-GRIFFITH, L.P
Defendant / Appellee: BRENDA BURMAN, in her official capacity as the Commissioner of the United States Bureau of Reclamation, SCOTT MCGOLPIN, in his official capacity as the Head of the County of Santa Barbara Public Works Department and Director of the County Water Agency, DAS WILLIAMS, Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisor, individually in his official capacity as policy maker for the Santa Barbara County Water Agency and as Purchaser of Emergency Road Access Easement and others
Colleen Courtney v. Housing Authority Kings County, et al
as 21-16887
Plaintiff / Appellant: COLLEEN MARIE COURTNEY
Defendant / Appellee: HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF KINGS, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF KINGS and CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING
Tillman Infrastructure LLC v. The Board of Supervisors of Culpeper County, Virginia et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2021cv00040
Plaintiff: Tillman Infrastructure LLC
Defendant: The Board of Supervisors of Culpeper County, Virginia and Culpeper County, Virginia
Intervenor Defendant: SBA Towers III, LLC
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 332
Shane Badding v. David Clouse, et al
as 21-16821
Plaintiff / Appellant: SHANE BADDING
Defendant / Appellee: DAVID CLOUSE, individually and in his official capacity as Sheriff of Navajo County, Arizona, UNKNOWN PENDERGAST, individually and in his official capacity as an employee of the County of Navajo, Arizona, and his official capacity as Sheriff Deputy of the Navajo County Sheriff's Office and UNKNOWN NEWMAN, individually and in his official capacity as an employee of the County of Navajo, Arizona, and his official capacity as Sheriff Deputy of the Navajo County Sheriff's Office
Defendant: COUNTY OF NAVAJO and NAVAJO COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

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?