Cases 21 - 30 of 133
Moeshe A. Perry v. Employment Development Department et al
as 2:2021cv00161
Plaintiff:
Moshe A. Perry
Defendant:
Employment Development Department and Sharon Hilliard
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983
Jean Perryman v. Employment Development Departm, et al
as 20-56335
Defendant / Appellee:
UI BRANCH LIAISON UNIT, MIC 39, NATASHA GILLYARD, Section Manager, TERRI JENNINGS, HRSD Payroll Services Group Manager and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JEAN PERRYMAN
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. $865,894.54 SEIZED FROM THREE BANK AND CREDIT UNION ACCOUNTS, THE BALANCES ON APPROXIMATELY THIRTEEN CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BENEFIT/DEBIT CARDS AND $11,679.00 IN U.S. C
as 2:2020cv07837
Defendant:
$865,894.54 SEIZED FROM THREE BANK AND CREDIT UNION ACCOUNTS, THE BALANCES ON APPROXIMATELY THIRTEEN CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT BENEFIT/DEBIT CARDS AND $11,679.00 IN U.S. C
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 0981
United States of America v. 865,894.54 Seized From Three Bank And Credit Union Accounts, The Balances on Approximately Thirteen California Employment Development Department Benefit Debit Cards and 11,679.00 in U.S. Currency
as 2:2020cv07844
Defendant:
$865,894.54 Seized From Three Bank And Credit Union Accounts, et al. and 865,894.54 Seized From Three Bank And Credit Union Accounts, The Balances on Approximately Thirteen California Employment Development Department Benefit Debit Cards and 11,679.00 in U.S. Currency
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 0981
Porter v. Employment Development Department
as 3:2020cv01164
Defendant:
Employment Development Department
Plaintiff:
Brian M. Porter
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 in
Jose Gonsalez v. Employment Development Departm, et al
as 20-55255
Defendant / Appellee:
EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, MYRA IBARRA, REX ABIVA and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JOSE J. GONSALEZ
CTA, et al v. Xavier Becerra, et al
as 20-55106
Plaintiff / Appellee:
CALIFORNIA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION, THOMAS ODOM and RAVINDER SINGH
Defendant / Appellant:
PATRICK W. HENNING, in his official capacity as the Director of the Employment Development Department, ANDRE SCHOORL, in his official capacity as the Acting Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California, LILIA GARCIA-BROWER, in her official capacity as Labor Commissioner of the State of California, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement and others
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant:
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
Amicus Curiae:
LOS ANGELES CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, CITY OF OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION, AFL-CIO and others
CTA, et al v. Xavier Becerra, et al
as 20-55107
Plaintiff / Appellee:
CALIFORNIA TRUCKING ASSOCIATION, THOMAS ODOM and RAVINDER SINGH
Defendant:
LILIA GARCIA-BROWER, in her official capacity as Labor Commissioner of the State of California, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, JULIE SU, in her official capacity as Secretary of the California Labor Workforce and Development Agency, ANDRE SCHOORL, in his official capacity as the Acting Director of the Department of Industrial Relations of the State of California and others
Intervenor Defendant / Appellant:
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS
Amicus Curiae:
CALIFORNIA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, CITY OF OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION, AFL-CIO and others
Jean Perryman v. Employment Development Department State of California
as 5:2019cv01152
Defendant:
Employment Development Department State of California
Plaintiff:
Jean Perryman
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
United States of America v. Sergio Perez et al
as 5:2019cv00915
Defendant:
San Bernardino County Treasurer-Tax Collector, Orange County Department of Child Support Services, American Express Centurion Bank and others
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 26 U.S.C. § 7401
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.
