Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Ahir, et al. v. City of Los Angeles, et al.
as 24-2268
Plaintiff:
NIKESHKUMAR AHIR, PINTUBEN NIKESHKUMAR AHIR and PAWANPUTRA 108, INC.
Defendant:
CITY OF LOS ANGELES, a municipal corporation, LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER, RYAN TAGUINES and others
Los Angeles Waterkeeper v. Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
as 2:2022cv01178
Plaintiff:
Los Angeles Waterkeeper
Defendant:
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
Cause Of Action: 33 U.S.C. § 1319 Clean Water Act
United States of America v. Marilyn Jefferson
as 2:2020cv08397
Defendant:
Marilyn Jefferson
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Garnishee:
Department of Water and Power City of Los Angeles and Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 3205 Garnishment
Nashat M. Habib et al v. Los Angeles Department of Water and Power LA DWP et al
as 2:2017cv07237
Defendant:
City of Los Angeles, Does, Marcie L. Edwards and others
Plaintiff:
Nashat M. Habib
The Kansas City Board v. EPA
as 15-1442
Petitioner:
The Kansas City Board of Public Utilities-- Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas
Respondent:
Environmental Protection Agency
Amicus Curiae For Respondent:
Institute for Policy Integrity at New York University School of Law
Movant-Amicus Curiae For Respondent:
National League of Cities, United States Conference of Mayors, Baltimore, MD and others
Movant-Intervenor For Respondent:
City of Los Angeles, Department of Water and Power
State of West Virginia, et al v. EPA, et al
as 15-1363
Petitioner:
State of West Virginia, State of Texas, State of Alabama and others
Respondent:
Environmental Protection Agency, Regina A. McCarthy, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency, E. Scott Pruitt, Administrator, United States Environmental Protection Agency and others
Intervenor:
American Wind Energy Association, Advanced Energy Economy, American Lung Association and others
Amicus Curiae:
William D. Ruckelshaus, William K. Reilly, Philip Zoebisch and others
California Department of Toxic Substance Control et al v. American Honda Motor Co Inc et al
as 2:2015cv00729
Defendant:
American Honda Motor Co Inc, Ameron International Corporation, Anardarko E&P Onshore LLC and others
Plaintiff:
California Department of Toxic Substance Control and The California Toxic Substances Control Account
City of Los Angeles Acting By and Through The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power v. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District et al
as 1:2012cv01683
Plaintiff:
City of Los Angeles Acting By and Through The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
Defendant:
Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District , California Air Resources Board, California State Lands Commission and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)
City of Los Angeles Acting By and Through The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power v. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District et al
as 1:2012at00664
Plaintiff:
City of Los Angeles Acting By and Through The Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
Defendant:
Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, California Air Resources Board, California State Lands Commission and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201
International Union of Operating Engineers, Stationary Engineers Local 39 Pension Trust Fund v. The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation et al
as 1:2012cv03067
Alternative Dispute Resolution (Adr) Provider:
School Employees Retirement System of Ohio, Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund and Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
Counter Defendant:
Paul Bensi, Jerry Kalmar, Lyle Setter and others
Plaintiff:
International union of operating engineers, stationary engineers local 39 pension trust fund, MDL Plaintiffs Executive Committee, Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association and others
Defendant:
The Bank of New York Mellon, The Bank of New York, The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
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.
