Constitutionality of State Statutes Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 11
We The Patriots USA, Inc. et al v. Lamont We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2023cv00737
Plaintiff: We The Patriots USA, Inc., Matthew Sherman, Brandon Tischer and others
Defendant: Ned Lamont
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
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
Berka v. Lamont et al
as 3:2022cv01629
Plaintiff: George Berka
Defendant: Ned Lamont, William Tong and City Of Middletown
Severino v. Spagnola et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2022cv01529
Plaintiff: Mr. Dillon Severino and Dillon Severino
Defendant: Fernando Spagnola, Ned Lamont, James Rovella and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gottlieb v. Ned
as 22-449
Plaintiff / Appellant: Andy Gottlieb, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Lorna Chand, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Richard Lacourciere and others
Defendant / Appellee: Ned Lamont, Governor of the State of Connecticut, Denise Merrill, Secretary of the State of Connecticut and Democratic State Central Committee
Gottlieb et al v. Lamont et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2020cv00623
Plaintiff: Lorna Chand, Andy Gottlieb, Jason W. Bartlett and others
Defendant: Denise Merrill, Ned Lamont and Democratic State Central Committee
Intervenor Plaintiff: Robert Halstead
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Urso v. Lamont We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 3:2020cv00529
Plaintiff: Lindy Robert Urso
Defendant: Ned Lamont
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Libertarian Party of Connecticut et al v. Lamont et al
as 3:2020cv00467
Defendant: Ned Lamont and Denise Merrill
Plaintiff: Daniel Reale, Libertarian Party of Connecticut and Harold Harris
Petitioner: Ethan Alcorn
Intervenor Plaintiff: Michael Telesca, Kyle Kenley Kopitke and The Independent Party
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
General Synod v. Thom Tillis
as 14-2225
Plaintiff - Appellee: GENERAL SYNOD OF THE UNITED CHURCH OF CHRIST, JOSEPH HOFFMAN, Reverend, NANCY ELLETT ALLISON, Reverend and others
Defendant: ROY COOPER, Attorney General of North Carolina, DREW REISINGER, Register of Deeds, WAYNE NIXON, Register of Deeds and others
Movant - Appellant: THOM TILLIS, Speaker of the NC House of Representatives and PHIL BERGER, President Pro Tempore of the NC Senate

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.


Why Is My Information Online?