Other Statutes Cases
Cases 11 - 20 of 439
Nebraska Central Railroad Co. v. FRA, et al
as 24-1774
Petitioner: Nebraska Central Railroad Company
Respondent: Federal Railroad Administration, Amit Bose, in his official capacity as Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration and United States Department of Transportation
BNSF Railway v. FRA
as 24-60173
Petitioner: BNSF Railway Company
Respondent: Federal Railroad Administration, Amit Bose, in his official capacity as Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration and United States Department of Transportation
Indiana Rail Road Company v. Federal Railroad Administration, et al
as 24-1550
Petitioner: INDIANA RAIL ROAD COMPANY
Respondent: FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION, AMIT BOSE, in his official capacity as Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration and UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Union Pacific Railroad Co. v. Federal Railroad Adm., et al
as 24-1736
Petitioner: Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Respondent: Federal Railroad Administration, Amit Bose, in his official capacity as Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration and United States Department of Transportation
Nat'l Trust for Historic Pres. in the US, et al v. Buttigieg, et al
as 24-1138
Plaintiff: NATIONAL TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION, FRIENDS OF THE FRANK J. WOOD BRIDGE, HISTORIC BRIDGE FOUNDATION and others
Defendant: PETER PAUL MONTGOMERY BUTTIGIEG, in his official capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of Transportation, SHAILEN BHATT, in his official capacity as Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, TODD JORGENSEN, in his official capacity as Administrator, Federal Highway Administration Maine Division and others
Rethink35 et al v. Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT) et al
as 1:2024cv00092
Plaintiff: Rethink35, Save Our Springs Alliance, Austin Justice Coalition and others
Defendant: Texas Department of Transportation (TXDOT), Marc Williams, United States Department of Transportation and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment
New Yorkers Against Congestion Pricing Tax et al v. United States Department of Transportation et al
as 1:2024cv00367
Plaintiff: New Yorkers Against Congestion Pricing Tax, Danny Buzzetta, Dr. Gregor Winkel and others
Defendant: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Shailen Bhatt and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Mulgrew et al v. United States Department of Transportation et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2024cv00081
Plaintiff: MICHAEL MULGREW, AFL-CIO, Vito J. Fossella and others
Defendant: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Shailen Bhatt and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment
United States of America, et al. v. United States District Court for the District of Oregon, Eugene, et al.
as 24-684
Petitioner: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CHRISTY GOLDFUSS, in her official capacity as Director of Council on Environmental Quality, SHAUN DONOVAN, in his official capacity as Director of the Office of Management and Budget and others
Respondent: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON, EUGENE
Defendant: STATE OF ALABAMA
Not Classified By Court: XIUHTEZCATL TONATIUH M., through his Guardian Tamara Roske-Martinez, ALEXANDER LOZNAK, JACOB LEBEL and others
Intervenor: THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS, AMERICAN FUEL & PETROCHEMICAL MANUFACTURERS, AMERICAN PETROLEUM INSTITUTE and others
Chan et al v. United States Department of Transportation et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2023cv10365
Plaintiff: Elizabeth Chan, Tamara Hoffman and Does 1 through 200
Defendant: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Shailen Bhatt and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question

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?