Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Cupp v. United Healthcare Services, Inc. et al
as 1:2024cv00175
Plaintiff:
Adminnistrator Christina Cupp
Defendant:
United Healthcare Services, EviCore Healthcare MSI LLC, Adena Health System dba Adena Regional Medical Center and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Cupp v. United Healthcare Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv01519
Plaintiff:
Christina L. Cupp
Defendant:
United Healthcare Services, Inc., EviCore Healthcare MSI, LLC doing business as EviCore Healthcare, Adena Health System doing business as Adena Regional Medical Center and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
ADCARE HOSPITAL - WORCESTER et al v. AZAR II
as 1:2019cv03484
Plaintiff:
AMITA HEALTH ALEXIAN BROTHERS MEDICAL CENTER ELK GROVE VILLAGE, ADVOCATE LUTHERAN GENERAL HOSPITAL, AMITA HEALTH SAINT ALEXIUS MEDICAL CENTER HOFFMAN ESTATES and others
Defendant:
ALEX M. AZAR II and ALEX M. AZAR, II
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 551
ADENA REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER et al
as 1:2019cv02818
Plaintiff:
ADVOCATE LUTHERAN GENERAL HOSPITAL, ASCENSION SAINT VINCENT ANDERSON, ASCENSION ALL SAINTS HOSPITAL and others
Defendant:
ALEX M. AZAR II
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1395
ADCARE HOSPITAL - WORCESTER et al v. AZAR
as 1:2018cv02113
Plaintiff:
AMITA HEALTH ALEXIAN BROTHERS MEDICAL CENTER ELK GROVE VILLAGE, ADVOCATE LUTHERAN GENERAL HOSPITAL, AMITA HEALTH SAINT ALEXIUS MEDICAL CENTER HOFFMAN ESTATES and others
Defendant:
ALEX M. AZAR II, in his official capacity as the Secretary of Health and Human Services and ALEX M. AZAR, II
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2005
Adena Regn Med Ctr, et al v. Leavitt, Michael O.
as 07-5273
Plaintiff - Appellee:
Adena Regional Medical Center, Alliance Community Hospital, Community Health Partners West Campus and others
Defendant - Appellant:
Michael O. Leavitt, Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services
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.
