Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Michael Washington v. Daviess County Hospital, et al
as 25-3054
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WASHINGTON
Defendant:
DAVIESS COUNTY HOSPITAL, doing business as SUGAR CREEK REHAB & CONVALESCENT CENTER, now konwn as APERION CARE GREENFIELD and CHOSEN CONSULTING, LLC
WASHINGTON v. DAVIESS COUNTY HOSPITAL et al
as 1:2024cv01914
Defendant:
CHOSEN CONSULTING, LLC and DAVIESS COUNTY HOSPITAL D/B/A SUGAR CREEK REHAB & CONVALESCENT CENTER N/K/A APERION CARE GREENFIELD doing business as SUGAR CREEK REHAB & CONVALESCENT CENTER now known as APERION CARE GREENFIELD
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WASHINGTON
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 24-2714
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Chosen Consulting, LLC et al v. Town Council of Highland, Indiana et al
as 2:2024cv00003
Plaintiff:
CHOSEN CONSULTING, LLC doing business as Chosen Healthcare, INDIANA ATC JV, LLC doing business as Hickory Recovery Network, HIGHLAND RECOVERY, LLC doing business as Hickory Treatment Center at Highland and others
Defendant:
TOWN COUNCIL OF HIGHLAND, INDIANA, HIGHLAND MUNICIPAL PLAN COMMISSION, TOWN OF HIGHLAND, INDIANA and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Berkshire Bank v. Chosen Consulting, LLC et al
as 4:2020cv40150
Plaintiff:
Berkshire Bank
Defendant:
Chosen Consulting, LLC, Moshe Orlinsky and Jay Orlinsky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Berkshire Bank v. Chosen Consulting, LLC et al
as 4:2020cv40105
Plaintiff:
Berkshire Bank
Defendant:
Chosen Consulting, LLC, Moshe Orlinsky and Jay Orlinsky
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2020cv00246
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 13131
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2019cv03794
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e
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.
