Cases 1 - 10 of 30
Wayside Church, et al v. Van Buren County, MI, et al
as 23-1471
Plaintiff / Appellee:
WAYSIDE CHURCH, an Illinois Not-For-Profit (Ecclesiastical) Corporation, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, HENDERSON HODGENS, Van Buren County, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, JOHN G. RIECKMAN, Alger County, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated in each of the aforesaid counties and others
Defendant:
VAN BUREN COUNTY, MI, in its individual Michigan municipal capacity and on behalf of a class of all other Michigan counties similarly situated
Appellant:
VISSER AND ASSOCIATES, PLLC, DONALD RAY VISSER, DONOVAN VISSER and others
Defendant / Appellee:
ALGER COUNTY, MI, ALLEGAN COUNTY, MI, ANTRIM COUNTY, MI and others
Wayside Church, et al v. Van Buren County, MI, et al
as 23-1339
Plaintiff / Appellee:
WAYSIDE CHURCH, an Illinois Not-For-Profit (Ecclesiastical) Corporation, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, HENDERSON HODGENS, Van Buren County, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, JOHN G. RIECKMAN, Alger County, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated in each of the aforesaid counties and others
Intervenor:
TAYLOR BEIGHTOL
Defendant / Appellee:
VAN BUREN COUNTY, MI, in its individual Michigan municipal capacity and on behalf of a class of all other Michigan counties similarly situated, ALGER COUNTY, MI, ALLEGAN COUNTY, MI and others
In re: Frederick Grainger, Jr., et al
as 23-103
Petitioner:
In re: FREDERICK GRAINGER, JR., BRIAN BEHOVITZ, MINDY CALKINS and others
Respondent:
WAYSIDE CHURCH, an Illinois Not-For-Profit (Ecclesiastical) Corporation, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, HENDERSON HODGENS, Van Buren County, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, JOHN G. RIECKMAN, Alger County, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated in each of the aforesaid counties and others
Zarlenga et al v. United States Of America et al
as 1:2022cv00372
Defendant:
Thrive Behavioral Health Center, Inc, United States Of America, George W. Bush and others
Plaintiff:
Lori A. Zarlenga and Victoria A. Zarlenga
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
Adams County, PA, et alIn re: Adams County, PA, et al
as 22-3653
Not Classified By Court:
In re: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION OPIATE LITIGATION
Petitioner:
ADAMS COUNTY, PA, LOWER MAKEFIELD TOWNSHIP, PA, ARMSTRONG COUNTY, PA and others
Charlie McClain, Jr., et alIn re: Charlie McClain, Jr., et al
as 22-1934
Petitioner:
In re: CHARLIE MCCLAIN, JR. and SALLY KATHERINE MCCLAIN
Respondent:
KENT COUNTY RECORDER OF DEEDS and FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORP
David Sper v. Kent County, MI, et al
as 21-2989
Plaintiff / Appellee:
DAVID SPER, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Jonathan Sper
Defendant / Appellant:
KENT COUNTY, MI, a Municipal Corporation, LAWRENCE A. STELMA, In his individual capacity, MICHELLE LAJOYE-YOUNG, In her individual capacity and others
Nickerson v. Rhode Island Department of Corrections, et al
as 21-1444
Defendant:
JAMES WEEDEN, Warden, CRANSTON, RI, C.O. OLIVER and others
Interested Party:
KENDALL JOHNSON and CODY-ALLEN ZAB
Defendant / Appellee:
RHODE ISLAND DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, JENNIFER CLARKE, Medical Doctor, CORY K. CLOUD and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JASON LAMONTE NICKERSON
Petitioner:
JOSEPH W. SHEPARD, JOHN PACHECO, JR. and QUANDELL HUSBAND
Trent Young v. Kent County Sheriff's Dept, et al
as 21-1222
Plaintiff / Appellee:
TRENT YOUNG
Defendant / Appellant:
WILLIAM JOURDEN and BRYAN CLARK
Defendant:
KENT COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
Ricardo Rosario v. Health Care (MDOC), et al
as 20-1646
Defendant:
HEALTH CARE (MDOC)
Defendant / Appellee:
KENT COUNTY, MI, UNKNOWN PARTY #3, Health Care Provider, KENT COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RICARDO CORA ROSARIO
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.
