Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Rune Kraft v. Chevron Corporation, et al
as 22-16087
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RUNE KRAFT
Defendant / Appellee:
CHEVRON CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, VALLEY PACIFIC PETROLEUM SYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation, VALLEY PACIFIC PETROLEUM SERVICES, INC., a California corporation and others
Hanson Aggregates Midwest Inc., et al v. Sara Ellis
as 22-1511
Petitioner:
HANSON AGGREGATES MIDWEST, INC., LEHIGH HANSON SERVICES LLC, LEHIGH HANSON, INC. and others
Respondent:
SARA L. ELLIS
Interested Party:
MARIANA OCHOA
Rune Kraft v. USDC-CALA
as 21-71230
Not Classified By Court:
In re: RUNE KRAFT, CALPORTLAND CONSTRUCTION, CALPORTLAND COMPANY and others
Petitioner:
RUNE KRAFT
Respondent:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES
Virina Steel, LLC v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 2:2021cv03461
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company, Lehigh Hanson, Inc., Union Pacific Railroad Company and others
Plaintiff:
Virgina Steel, LLC and Virina Steel, LLC
Rune Kraft, et al v. CalPortland Construction, et al
as 21-55026
Defendant / Appellee:
CEMEX CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS PACIFIC LLC, CEMEX S.A.B. DE C.V., TAIHEIYO CEMENT CORPORATION and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
RUNE KRAFT, Relator; ex rel. United States of America; ex rel. State of California
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
LEHIGH HANSON, INC. v. BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY et al
as 1:2020cv01494
Defendant:
NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY, UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY and others
Plaintiff:
LEHIGH HANSON, INC.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
The United States of America et al v. CalPortland Construction et al
as 2:2016cv04479
Defendant:
CalPortland Company, CalPortland Construction, Cemex Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Rune Kraft, The State of California and United States of America
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
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.
