Cases 31 - 40 of 185
Government Employees Insurance Co. et al v. Gilberto Seco, M.D. et al
as 1:2021cv24155
Plaintiff:
Government Employees Insurance Co., Geico Indemnity Co., GEICO General Insurance Company and others
Defendant:
Gilberto Seco, M.D., Med-Union Medical Center, Inc., Jorge A. Gonzalez and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Government Employees Insurance Co. et al v. David Kalin, M.D. et al
as 8:2021cv02556
Plaintiff:
Government Employees Insurance Co., Geico Indemnity Co., GEICO General Insurance Company and others
Defendant:
David Kalin, M.D., Himes Walk In Clinic L.L.C., Maikel Cabrera L.M.T. and others
Not Classified By Court:
Gregory P. Holder and Norman Gerstein
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO. et al v. CLINICA DE ACUPUNTURA Y SALUD NATURAL, LLC et al
as 2:2022cv02639
Defendant:
JULIA IOFFE, M.D., CLINICA DE ACUPUNTURA Y SALUD NATURAL, LLC doing business as ACUPUNCTURE & CHIROPRACTIC CLINIC OF N.J., TAE YOUNG HONG, D.C., L.AC. and others
Plaintiff:
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO., GEICO INDEMNITY CO., GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY and others
Cross Defendant:
CLINICA DE ACUPUNTURA Y SALUD NATURAL, LLC
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Government Employees Insurance Co. et al v. Northern Physical Therapy, Chiropractic, & Acupuncture, PLLC et al
as 1:2022cv00568
Plaintiff:
Government Employees Insurance Co., GEICO Indemnity Co., GEICO General Insurance Company and others
Defendant:
Northern Physical Therapy, Chiropractic, & Acupuncture, PLLC, Sangwoo Mah, D.C., Seung-Hyuk Choi, P.T. and others
Not Classified By Court:
David P Horowitz
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO et al v. MIAN et al
as 3:2022cv00233
Defendant:
ATA CHAUDHRY, SHAHID MIAN, SURGERY CENTER OF ORADELL, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO., GEICO INDEMNITY CO., GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO. et al v. MOUNT PROSPECT CHIROPRACTIC CENTER, P.A. et al
as 2:2022cv00737
Plaintiff:
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO., GEICO INDEMNITY CO., GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY and others
Defendant:
MOUNT PROSPECT CHIROPRACTIC CENTER, P.A. doing business as MOUNT PROSPECT HEALTH CENTER, TERRY MCSWEENEY, D.C., HASSAN MEDICAL PAIN RELIEF AND WELLNESS CENTER LLC doing business as HASSAN SPINE AND SPORTS MEDICINE and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO. et al v. BERGER, D.C. et al
as 2:2022cv00682
Plaintiff:
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO., GEICO INDEMNITY CO., GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY and others
Defendant:
PETER BERGER, D.C., HAWTHORNE PAIN & SPINE CENTER, LLC, JON-PAUL DADAIAN, M.D., and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO. et al v. NJ INSTITUTE FOR SPINE AND JOINT PAIN, PC et al
as 2:2022cv02481
Defendant:
HEALTH MEDICAL REHABILITATION CENTER, L.L.C., NJ INSTITUTE FOR SPINE AND JOINT PAIN, PC, JORGE MENDEZ, M.D. and others
Plaintiff:
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO., GEICO INDEMNITY CO., GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO. et al v. FANO et al
as 2:2021cv10433
Defendant:
M.D. DELYS ST. HILL, M.D. RAVI PATEL, M.D. CYRUS KAO and others
Plaintiff:
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO., GEICO INDEMNITY CO., GEICO CASUALTY CO. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Government Employees Insurance Co. et al v. Ronald Panella, M.D. et al
as 8:2022cv00321
Plaintiff:
Government Employees Insurance Co., GEICO Indemnity Co., GEICO General Insurance Company and others
Defendant:
Ronald Panella, Best Care Medical Group, Inc., Jorge Consuegra and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
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.
