Cases 11 - 20 of 49
Gabbi Lemos v. County of Sonoma, et al
as 19-15222
Plaintiff / Appellant:
GABBI LEMOS
Defendant / Appellee:
STEVE FREITAS, MARCUS HOLTON and COUNTY OF SONOMA
County of Sonoma, California v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al
as 1:2018op45849
Defendant:
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., AmerisourceBergen Corporation, Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
County of Sonoma, California
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
County of Sonoma, California v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al
as CAN/3:18-cv-03806
Plaintiff:
County of Sonoma, California
Defendant:
Purdue Pharma L.P. , Cephalon, Inc. , Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. and others
County of Sonoma, California v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al
as 3:2018cv03806
Defendant:
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., AmerisourceBergen Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
County of Sonoma, California
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
In Re: Libor-Based Financial
as 17-2413
Plaintiff:
FTC Capital GMBH, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Courtyard at Amwell II, LLC, Greenwich Commons II, LLC and others
Plaintiff - Appellant:
California Public Plaintiffs, San Diego Association of Governments, City of Richmond and others
Defendant - Appellee:
Bank of America Corporation, Bank of America, N.A., The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd. and others
Defendant:
Rabobank Group, Credit Suisse Group, NA, Societe Generale and others
In Re: Libor-Based Financial
as 17-2056
Plaintiff:
FTC Capital GMBH, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Carpenters Pension Fund of West Virginia, City of Dania Beach Police & Firefighters' Retirement System, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and others
Plaintiff - Appellant:
FTC Futures Fund PCC Ltd, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, FTC Futures Fund SICAV, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Metzler Investment GmbH, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated and others
Defendant - Appellee:
Lloyds Banking Group plc, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC, Credit Suisse Group AG and others
Defendant:
Credit Agricole S.A., Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, BNP Paribas S.A. and others
In Re: Libor-Based Financial
as 17-1915
Plaintiff:
FTC Futures Fund PCC Ltd, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Carpenters Pension Fund of West Virginia, City of Dania Beach Police & Firefighters' Retirement System, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and others
Plaintiff - Appellant:
City of New Britain, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, Vistra Energy Corporation and others
Defendant - Appellee:
Lloyds Banking Group plc, Bank of America Corporation, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC and others
Defendant:
The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC, The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC, Bank of Nova Scotia and others
In Re: Libor-Based Financial
as 17-1569
Plaintiff:
Carpenters Pension Fund of West Virginia, City of Dania Beach Police & Firefighters' Retirement System, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Ravan Investments, LLC and others
Plaintiff - Appellant:
Schwab Short-Term Bond Market Fund, Schwab Total Bond Market Fund, Schwab U.S. Dollar Liquid Assets Fund and others
Defendant - Appellee:
Lloyds Banking Group plc, Bank of America Corporation, The Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC and others
Defendant:
Credit Agricole S.A., Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, BNP Paribas S.A. and others
Meza v. Sonoma County Superior Court Family Law Division, Dept. 23 et al
as 4:2017cv02001
Plaintiff:
Rudy Meza
Defendant:
Sonoma County Superior Court Family Law Division, Dept. 23 , Dee Schilling, Zilda McCausland and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Sonoma County Association of Retired Employees v. County of Sonoma
as 4:2015mc80250
Plaintiff:
Sonoma County Association of Retired Employees
Defendant:
County of Sonoma
Cause Of Action: M:08-85c
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.
