Cases 1 - 10 of 100
Cain v. Moore et al
as 5:2026cv00200
Plaintiff:
Anthony Cain
Defendant:
Judge Andra Moore, Dennis Foust, Judge Jaminson and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Gilbert Raynor v. US
as 26-6672
Plaintiff:
GILBERT R. RAYNOR
Defendant:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, THE UNITED STATES, PORTSMOUTH POLICE DEPARTMENT and others
Ronald Emrit v. Barack Obama, et al
as 26-1969
Plaintiff:
Ronald Satish Emrit, also known as Presidential Candidate Number P60005535, also known as Presidential Committee/Political Action Committee/Separate Segregated Fund (SSF) Number C00569897, doing business as United Emrits of America
Defendant:
Former President Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle Obama, Former President Joe Biden and others
Ronald Emrit v. Barack Obama, et al
as 26-1672
Plaintiff:
Ronald Satish Emrit, also known as Presidential Candidate Number P60005535, also known as Presidential Committee/Political Action Committee/Separate Segregated Fund (SSF) Number C00569897, doing business as United Emrits of America
Defendant:
Former President Barack Hussein Obama, (BHO), Michelle Obama, Former President Joe Biden and others
Emrit v. Obama et al
as 5:2026cv00129
Plaintiff:
Ronald Satish Emrit Presidential Candidate Number P60005535 "also known as" (aka) Ronald Satish Emrit, & Presidential Committee/Political Action Committee/Separate Segregated Fund (SSF) Number C00569897 d/b/a United Emrits of America
Defendant:
Former President Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle Obama, Former President Joe Biden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Presidential Candidate Number P60005535 v. Obama et al
as 6:2026cv03225
Plaintiff:
Presidential Candidate Number P60005535 also known as Ronald Satish Emrit also known as Presidential Committee/Political Action Committee/Separate Segregated Fund (SSF) Number C00569897 doing business as United Emrits of America, Ronald Satish Emrit and Presidential Committee
Defendant:
Former President Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle Obama, Former President Joe Biden and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Emrit et al v. Obama et al
as 3:2026cv00260
Plaintiff:
Ronald Satish Emrit, Presidential Candidate Number P and Presidential Committee/Political Action Committee/Separate Segregated Fund (SSF) Number C00569897 doing business as United Emrits of America
Defendant:
Former President Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle Obama, Former President Joe Biden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 bv Bivens Non-Prisoner
Presidential Candidate Number P60005535 v. Former President Barack Hussein Obama (BHO) et al
as 3:2026cv02047
Plaintiff:
Presidential Candidate Number P60005535, Ronald Satish Emrit and Presidential Committee/Political Action Committee/Separate Segregated Fund (SSF) Number C00569897 doing business as United Emrits of America
Defendant:
Former President Barack Hussein Obama (BHO), Michelle Obama, Former President Joe Biden and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Emrit et al v. Obama et al
as 3:2026cv00306
Plaintiff:
Ronald Satish Emrit, Presidential Candidate Number P and Presidential Committee/Political Action Committee/Separate Segregated Fund Number C00569897 doing business as United Emrits of America
Defendant:
Former President Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle Obama, Former President Joe Biden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Presidential Candidate Number P60005535 v. Obama et al
as 1:2026cv00452
Plaintiff:
Presidential Candidate Number P60005535 Presidential Committee/Political Action Committee/Separate Segregated Fund (SSF) Number C00569897 also known as Ronald Satish Emrit doing business as United Ernrits of America and Ronald Satish Emrit
Defendant:
Former President Barack Hussein Obama, Michelle Obama, Former President Joe Biden and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights 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.
