Cases 21 - 30 of 32
USA, et al v. US Board of Water Comm'r, et al
as 15-16316
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Intervenor-Plaintiff:
WALKER RIVER PAIUTE TRIBE and MINERAL COUNTY
Petitioner:
NATIONAL FISH AND WILDLIFE FOUNDATION
Respondent - Appellant:
NEVADA STATE ENGINEER
Participant - Appellee:
UNITED STATES BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS
Objector - Appellee:
BACKTRACK, LLC, BALE COUNTER, INC., GARY M. BERRINGTON and others
Respondent:
NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE, CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD, MONO COUNTY, California and others
Defendant:
WALKER LAKE WORKING GROUP and WALKER RIVER IRRIGATION DISTRICT
United States of America v. Walker River Irrigation
as 3:1973cv00125
Petitioner:
69841 Park Nichol's River Split Ranch, LLC, Blasco Family Limited and Ross E. de Lipkau
Counter Defendant:
James J. Baran, George L Herbst, David Wallace Park and others
Respondent:
Borsini Ranch, Inc., Break-A-Heart, LLC., California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and others
Defendant:
Circle Bar N Ranch, L.L.C. et al., April Christine Deitrick, Kirt Allen Deitrick and others
Consol Defendant:
Scott DeChambeau
Unknown:
Thomas J. McKinney, Thomas J. McKinney, Courtney Brown and others
775) 945-0700 (fax:
Mineral County
541) 485-2457 (fax:
Michael Axline and Michael Axline
Interested Party:
Hugh Ricci, Tracy Taylor and U.S. Water Commissioner's Board
Intervenor Defendant:
State Water Resources Control Board
Plaintiff:
United States Of America
Intervenor Plaintiff:
Walker River Paiute Tribe
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2010cv00503
Debtor:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Miscellaneou:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Intervenor_defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 157
United States of America v. City of Alameda et al
as 4:2009cv05684
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
City of Alameda, City of Albany, City of Berkeley and others
Miscellaneou:
The People of the State of California, California State Water Resources Control Board and California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Francisco Region
Cause Of Action: 33 U.S.C. § 1319 Clean Water Act
Central Delta Water Agency et al v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service et al
as 1:2009cv00861
Plaintiff:
Central Delta Water Agency and South Delta Water Agency
Defendant:
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, J. William McDonald, Mike Chotkowski and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Central Delta Water Agency et al v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service et al
as 1:2009cv00861
Plaintiff:
Central Delta Water Agency, Central Delta Water Agency, South Delta Water Agency and others
Defendant:
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Rowan Gould, Ken McDermond and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4321 Review of Agency Action-Environment
United States of America et al v. East Bay Municipal Utility District
as 3:2009cv00186
Plaintiff:
United States of America, United States of America, United States of America and others
Defendant:
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Plaintiff
United States of America et al v. East Bay Municipal Utility District
as 4:2009cv00186
Plaintiff:
United States of America, United States of America, United States of America and others
Defendant:
East Bay Municipal Utility District
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Plaintiff
Murphey et al v. United States Environmental Protection Agency et al
as 3:2008cv04876
Plaintiff:
Dee Thomas Murphey and Aes, Inc.
Defendant:
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Stephen L. Johnson, State of California and others
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
CASITAS MUNICIPAL WATER V US
as 07-5153
Amicus Curiae:
A. Dan Tarlock, Adell Amos, Alexandra Klass and others
Plaintiff-Appellant:
Casitas Municipal Water District
Defendant-Appellee:
United States
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.
