Cases 1 - 10 of 22
HAYES v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2023vv02105
Petitioner:
GARY HAYES
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
Burger v. US
as 24-1249
Plaintiff / Appellee:
BASIL AGAPION, SOPHIA S. AGAPION, KATHE BURGER and others
Plaintiff:
GUILFORD BUILDERS SUPPLY CO.
Defendant / Appellant:
UNITED STATES
Chapman Spring/Garden, LLC v. US
as 24-1250
Plaintiff / Appellee:
CHAPMAN SPRING/GARDEN, LLC, CHANEY-FRYE #4, LLC, D.S. CHANEY PROPERTIES #6, LLC and others
Defendant / Appellant:
UNITED STATES
HAYES v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2023vv01448
Petitioner:
AISLYNN HAYES
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
HAYES v. SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
as 1:2022vv01547
Petitioner:
DONNA HAYES
Respondent:
SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 300 Vaccine Injury Act
Hayes v. Wilkie
as 20-1892
Claimant:
GEORGE S. HAYES
Respondent / Appellee:
ROBERT WILKIE, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
BANTUM et al v. USA
as 1:2016cv00533
Plaintiff:
JEMILL CHARMAINE BANTUM, TRACY APPLINE, FARUQ I. ROBINSON and others
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1491
Type:
Other Statutes
BALAGNA et al v. USA
as 1:2014cv00021
Plaintiff:
ELLEN BALAGNA , MARK S. BALAGNA , ORLANDO C CROWTHERS and others
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1491
Type:
Other Statutes
HAYES v. USA
as 1:2010cv00189
Plaintiff:
STEVEN G. HAYES
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1491
INTERACTIVE HEALTH V KING KONG USA
as 09-1141
Defendant/Cross Appellant:
American Lighting Industry, Inc., Bernard Koay, King Kong USA, Inc. and others
Defendant-Appellee:
Blair Hayes
Plaintiff-Appellant:
Daito Dengki Kogyu KK (dba Daito Electric Machine Industry) and Interactive Health LLC (n/k/a Human Touch LLC)
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.
