Cases 1 - 10 of 593
TitleMax of South Carolina Inc v. Halik et al
as 4:2024cv04714
Defendant:
Rotanza Hurt, Brandon Halik and State of North Carolina
Plaintiff:
TitleMax of South Carolina Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Declaratory Judgment
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al v. REALPAGE, INC.
as 1:2024cv00710
Plaintiff:
STATE OF OREGON, STATE OF MINNESOTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA and others
Defendant:
REALPAGE, INC.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
Amy Bryant v. Joshua Stein
as 24-1617
Defendant:
WILLIAM M. BRAWLEY, in his official capacity as a member of the North Carolina Medical Board, PHD MICHAUX R. KILPATRICK, M.D., KODY H. KINSLEY, in his official capacity as the North Carolina Secretary of Health and Human Services and others
Plaintiff:
AMY BRYANT, M.D.
Intervenor:
TIMOTHY K. MOORE and PHILIP E. BERGER
Amicus Curiae:
STATE OF FLORIDA, CONCERNED WOMEN FOR AMERICA, FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL and others
Simons v. State of North Carolina
as 3:2024cv00640
Defendant:
State of North Carolina
Plaintiff:
Tamala M. Simons
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Amy Bryant v. William Brawley
as 24-1600
Defendant:
WILLIAM M. BRAWLEY, in his official capacity as a member of the North Carolina Medical Board, KODY H. KINSLEY, in his official capacity as the North Carolina Secretary of Health and Human Services, PHD MICHAUX R. KILPATRICK, M.D. and others
Intervenor:
TIMOTHY K. MOORE and PHILIP E. BERGER
Plaintiff:
AMY BRYANT, M.D.
Amicus Curiae:
FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL, CONCERNED WOMEN FOR AMERICA, STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA and others
Amy Bryant v. Timothy Moore
as 24-1576
Defendant:
PHD, FNP-BC SHARONA Y. JOHNSON, WILLIAM M. BRAWLEY, in his official capacity as a member of the North Carolina Medical Board, JD JOSHUA D. MALCOLM, in his official capacity as a member of the North Carolina Medical Board and others
Intervenor:
TIMOTHY K. MOORE and PHILIP E. BERGER
Plaintiff:
AMY BRYANT, M.D.
Amicus Curiae:
AMERICAN CENTER FOR LAW AND JUSTICE, NC VALUES INSTITUTE, FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL and others
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Stratfs, LLC (f/k/a Strategic Financial Solutions, LLC)
as 24-1541
Defendant:
STRATFS, LLC, STRATEGIC CLIENT SUPPORT, LLC, THE BLUST FAMILY IRREVOCABLE TRUST THROUGH DONALD J. HOLMGREN, TRUSTEE, Relief Defendant and others
Plaintiff:
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, by Letitia James, Attorney General of the State of New York, STATE OF COLORADO, ex rel, Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General and others
Intervenor:
CIBC BANK USA and VALLEY NATIONAL BANK
Receiver:
THOMAS W. MCNAMARA
United States of America et al v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv03973
Plaintiff:
District of Columbia, State of Oklahoma, State of Oregon and others
Defendant:
Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. and Ticketmaster L.L.C.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation (Monopolizing Trade)
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Stratfs, LLC (f/k/a Strategic Financial Solutions, LLC)
as 24-727
Plaintiff:
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, STATE OF COLORADO, ex rel, Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General, THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, by Letitia James, Attorney General of the State of New York and others
Defendant:
STRATEGIC CLIENT SUPPORT, LLC, formerly known as Pioneer Client Services, LLC, STRATEGIC FS BUFFALO, LLC, STRATEGIC NYC, LLC and others
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Stratfs,
as 24-719
Plaintiff:
CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION BUREAU, THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, by Letitia James, Attorney General of the State of New York, STATE OF COLORADO, ex rel, Philip J. Weiser, Attorney General and others
Defendant:
THE BLUST FAMILY IRREVOCABLE TRUST THROUGH DONALD J. HOLMGREN, TRUSTEE, Relief Defendant, STRATFS, LLC, formerly known as Strategic Financial Solutions, LLC, STRATEGIC CLIENT SUPPORT, LLC, formerly known as Pioneer Client Services, LLC and others
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.
