Cases 1 - 10 of 100
State of California, et al. v. United States Department of the Interior, et al.
as 25-7171
Plaintiff:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA and GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, DOUG BURGUM, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior, SCOTT DAVIS, Acting Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs and others
Appellee:
KOI NATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, Proposed Intervenor
Elden v. Fredrickson, et al.
as 25-6984
Plaintiff:
SPENCER ELDEN
Defendant:
NIRVANA, LLC, UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP, INC., THE DAVID GEFFEN COMPANY and others
Movant:
TIMOTHY FREDRICKSON, Proposed Intervenor-Defendant
Roe, et al. v. Petersen, et al.
as 25-6980
Plaintiff:
HELEN ROE, a minor, by and through her parent and next friend Megan Roe, JAMES POE, a minor, by and through his parent and next friend Laura Poe and CARL VOE, a minor, by and hrough his parent and next friend Rachel Voe
Defendant:
SHEILA SJOLANDER, in her official capacity as State Registrar of Vital Records and Interim Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services and DEBORAH JOHNSTON, in her official capacity as State Registrar of Vital Records and Interim Director of the Arizona Department of Health Services
Movant:
WARREN PETERSEN, President of the Arizona State Senate; Proposed Intervenor-Defendant and STEVE MONTENEGRO, Speaker of the Arizona House of Representatives; Proposed Intervenor-Defendant
Amicus Curiae:
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SCHOLARS, IN CASE NOS. 25-6970 AND 25-6980, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, STATE OF WASHINGTON and others
State of California, et al. v. Koi Nation of Northern California, et al.
as 25-6860
Plaintiff:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA and GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR OF CALIFORNIA
Defendant:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, DOUG BURGUM, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Interior, SCOTT DAVIS, Acting Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs and others
Movant:
KOI NATION OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, Proposed Intervenor
Amazon.com Services LLC v. New York State Public Employment Relations Board et al
as 1:2025cv05311
Plaintiff:
Amazon.com Services LLC
Defendant:
New York State Public Employment Relations Board, Timothy Connick, Barbara C. Deinhardt and others
Amicus Curiae:
Associated Builders and Contractors, Associated General Contractors, New York State, Business Council of New York State, Inc, and others
Intervenor:
Intervenor Amazon Labor Union No. 1 International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 151 Labor: Review of Agency Action
GRIGGS v. MONMOUTH COUNTY FAMILY COURT et al
as 3:2025cv14832
Plaintiff:
DERRICK GRIGGS
Defendant:
MONMOUTH COUNTY FAMILY COURT, JUDGE TERESA KONDRUP COYLE, JUDGE THOMAS COMER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Jones v. Jones, et al.
as 25-2326
Plaintiff:
JAMES EDWARD JONES
Defendant:
SPECIAL COMMITMENT CENTER, MARK STRONG, CEO, TODD DUBBLE, Assistant Director and others
Movant:
JYJY JONES, Proposed Intervenor-Plaintiff
State of Washington, et al. v. Trump, et al.
as 25-674
Plaintiff:
STATE OF WASHINGTON, STATE OF ARIZONA, STATE OF ILLINOIS and others
Defendant:
DONALD J. TRUMP, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, BENJAMINE HUFFMAN, in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the United States Department of Homeland Security and others
Movant:
WILLIAM NELSON, Proposed Intervenor
Harvey, et al. v. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC
as 25-288
Plaintiff:
BRANDON HARVEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Appellant:
MATTHEW LUCADANO, Proposed Intervenor and TRACY CHEN, Proposed Intervenor
Defendant:
MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC
Resource Renewal Institute, et al. v. Agricultural Workers, et al.
as 25-251
Intervenor:
BETTY NUNES, JANELLE KEHOE, JULIE EVANS-ROSSITTI and others
Plaintiff:
CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, RESOURCE RENEWAL INSTITUTE and WESTERN WATERSHEDS PROJECT
Defendant:
NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
Movant:
AGRICULTURAL WORKERS, Does 1-8; Proposed Intervenors
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.
