Other Statutes Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 32
Universal Life Church Monastery Storehouse v. American Marriage Ministries
as 22-1744
Appellant: UNIVERSAL LIFE CHURCH MONASTERY STOREHOUSE
Appellee: AMERICAN MARRIAGE MINISTRIES
Sohail Butt v. John Zimmerman, et al
as 21-14187
Plaintiff / Appellant: SOHAIL N. BUTT
Defendant / Appellee: JOHN BRIGHAM ZIMMERMAN, Georgia Composite Board of Professional Counselors, Social Workers and Marriage and Family Therapists, in his official and individual capacities, TOMMY BLACK, in his individual and official capacity as a board member of Georgia Composite Board of Professional Counselors, Social Workers and Marriage & Family Counselors, ARTHUR WILLIAMS, in his individual and official capacity as a board member of Georgia Composite Board of Professional Counselors, Social Workers and Marriage & Family Counselors and others
Universal Life Church Monastery Storehouse v. American Marriage Ministrie et al
as 3:2021mc80040
Defendant: DYLAN WALL, SARA WHITE, GLEN YOSHIOKA and others
Plaintiff: UNIVERSAL LIFE CHURCH MONASTERY STOREHOUSE
Not Classified By Court: Google LLC
Victoria Whorton v. Cognitians, LLC, et al
as 21-3108
Plaintiff / Appellant: VICTORIA A. WHORTON
Defendant / Appellee: MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OH PROBATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT, Attn: William Lashley and Carlos Walker, MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OH, Attn: Debbie Lieberman and Michael Colbert, COUNSELOR SOCIAL WORKER MARRIAGE FAMILY THERAPIST BOARD, Attn: William Hegarty and others
Altintas v. Altintas
as 6:2018cv01578
In Re: The Marriage of
Defendant: Angela S. Altintas
Plaintiff: Cihanger A. Altintas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
Natl Organization for Marriage v. US, Internal Revenue Service We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 14-2363
Plaintiff - Appellant: THE NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MARRIAGE, INC.
Defendant - Appellee: THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Internal Revenue Service
Center for Competitive Politic v. Kamala Harris
as 14-15978
Amicus Curiae: NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MARRIAGE EDUCATIONAL TRUST FUND, NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MARRIAGE, INC. and CHARLES M. WATKINS
Defendant / Appellee: KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney General, in her official capacity as Attorney General of the State of California
Plaintiff / Appellant: CENTER FOR COMPETITIVE POLITICS
Deanna Geiger, et al v. John Kitzhaber, et al
as 14-35427
Plaintiff - Appellee: DEANNA L. GEIGER, JANINE M. NELSON, ROBERT DUEHMIG and others
Defendant - Appellee: JOHN KITZHABER, in his official capacity as Governor of Oregon, ELLEN ROSENBLUM, in her official capacity as Attorney General of Oregon, JENNIFER WOODWARD, in her official capacity as State Registrar, Center for Health Statistics, Oregon Health Authority and others
Movant - Appellant: NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR MARRIAGE, INC., Proposed Intervenor; on behalf of their Oregon Members
Bishop, et al v. Smith, et al
as 14-5006
Plaintiff - Appellant: GAY E. PHILLIPS and SUSAN G. BARTON
Plaintiff: MARY BISHOP and SHARON BALDWIN
Defendant - Appellee: SALLY HOWE SMITH, in her official capacity as Court Clerk for Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma
Defendant: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. Eric H. Holder, Jr., in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States of America
Defendant-Intervenor: BIPARTISAN LEGAL ADVISORY GROUP OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THAD BALKMAN and OKLAHOMAN'S FOR PROTECTION OF MARRIAGE
Bishop, et al v. Smith, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 14-5003
Plaintiff - Appellee: SHARON BALDWIN, MARY BISHOP, GAY E. PHILLIPS, individuals and others
Defendant - Appellant: SALLY HOWE SMITH, in her official capacity as Court Clerk for Tulsa County, State of Oklahoma
Defendant: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel. Eric H. Holder, Jr., in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States of America
Defendant-Intervenor: BIPARTISAN LEGAL ADVISORY GROUP OF THE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, THAD BALKMAN and OKLAHOMAN'S FOR PROTECTION OF MARRIAGE

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?