Cases 31 - 40 of 539
USA v. Davis
as 23-50797
Plaintiff / Appellee:
United States of America
Defendant / Appellant:
Gavin Blake Davis
Haynes, et al. v. City and County of San Francisco, et al.
as 23-3327
Plaintiff:
CHERYL COTTERILL
Defendant / Appellee:
CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Defendant:
MATHEW MASON, HUGH HALL, GREGORY HICKS and others
Not Yet Classified:
GREGORY MELVIN HAYNES, ATTORNEY, counsel for plaintiff
Fashion Exchange, LLC v. Hybrid Promotions, LLC
as 23-7653
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FASHION EXCHANGE, LLC
Defendant / Appellee:
HYBRID PROMOTIONS, LLC, JARROD DOGAN, GAVIN DOGAN and others
Carolan et al v. USAA Federal Savings Bank
as 5:2023cv00237
Plaintiff:
Gavin Carolan, Kenia Carolan and Gavin V Carolan
Defendant:
USAA Federal Savings Bank
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Francis v. DLocal Limited et al
as 1:2023cv07501
Plaintiff:
David Gavin Francis
Defendant:
DLocal Limited, Sebastian Kanovich and Diego Cabrera Canay
Petitioner:
Paulette Laurenzi
In Re: Talasazan
as 23-1780
Petitioner:
HAREL TALASAZAN
Respondent:
ROBERT M. FARRELL, MARIA RAIA HAMILTON, MA BOARD OF BAR OVERSEERS and others
SHERMAN v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2023vv01529
Petitioner:
GAVIN SHERMAN
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
VENTURE TECH, LLC et al v. WAX
as 1:2023cv07589
Plaintiff:
VENTURE TECH, LLC and RIPPLING PEO 1, INC.
Defendant:
GAVIN WAX
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 dj Declaratory Judgment
Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians v. Newsom
as 2:2023at00820
Plaintiff:
Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians
Defendant:
Gavin Newsom
Cause Of Action: 25 U.S.C. § 640 Indian Tribal Rights
Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians v. Newsom et al
as 2:2023cv01790
Plaintiff:
Buena Vista Rancheria of Me-Wuk Indians
Defendant:
Gavin Newsom and State of California
Cause Of Action: 25 U.S.C. § 640 Indian Tribal Rights
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.
