Other Statutes Cases filed in Texas
Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Fund Texas Choice et al v. Paxton et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2022cv00859
Plaintiff: Fund Texas Choice, The North Texas Equal Access Fund, The Lilith Fund for Reproductive Equity and others
Defendant: Ken Paxton, Susan R. Deski, Julie Renken and others
Amicus Curiae: Physicians For Reproductive Health, State of California, State of Colorado and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Constitutionality of State Statute(s)
United States of America v. State of Texas Featured Case We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2021cv00796
Plaintiff: United States Of America
Defendant: State of Texas
Intervenor Defendant: Erick Graham, Jeff Tuley, Mistie Sharp and others
Amicus Curiae: State of Massachusetts, State of California, State of Colorado and others
Petitioner: Felipe Gomez
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 USA Plaintiff
Braidwood Management Inc. et al. v. Xavier Becerra et al. We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 4:2020cv00283
Plaintiff: John Kelley, Kelley Orthodontics, Joel Starnes and others
Defendant: Steven T. Mnuchin, Alex M. Azar II, Eugene Scalia and others
Amicus Curiae: State of Illinois, State of California, State of Colorado and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2201 Declaratory Judgment
Polansky et al v. Executive Health Resources Inc. et al
as 1:2018mc00331
Interested Party: Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC
Defendant: Executive Health Resources Inc.
Movant: M.D., M.P.H. Jesse Polansky and United States of America
Plaintiff: M.D., M.P.H. Jesse Polansky, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, The Commonwealth of Virginia and others
Respondent: Seton Medical Center
Cause Of Action: Motion to Compel
Federal Trade Commission et al v. Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing, Inc. et al
as 6:2014mc00012
Plaintiff: Federal Trade Commission, State of Illinois, Commonwealth of Kentucky and others
Defendant: Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing, Inc., FHTM, Inc., Alan Clark Holdings, LLC and others
Receiver: Robb Evans
Federal Trade Commission et al v. Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing Inc et al
as 3:2014mc00072
Plaintiff: Federal Trade Commission, State of Illinois, Commonwealth of Kentucky and others
Defendant: Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing Inc, FHTM Inc, Alan Clark Holdings LLC and others
Receiver: Robb Evans
Federal Trade Commission et al v. Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing, Inc. et al
as 5:2014mc00441
Defendant: Alan Clark Holdings, LLC, FHTM Canada, Inc., FHTM, INC. and others
Plaintiff: Commonwealth of Kentucky, Federal Trade Commission, State of Illinois and others
Federal Trade Commission et al v. Fortune HI-Tech Marketing, Inc. et al
as 7:2014mc00684
Plaintiff: Federal Trade Commission , State of Illinois, Commonwealth of Kentucky and others
Defendant: Fortune HI-Tech Marketing, Inc. , FHTM, Inc. , Alan Clark Holdings, Inc. and others
USA, et al v. Caremark, Inc, et al
as 5:2012cv00929
Neutral: Karl Bayer and Paul Stickney
Special Master: Karl Bayer
Intervenor Defendant: Caremark Inc. and Caremark RX, Inc.
Defendant: Caremark International Holdings, Inc., Caremark International, Inc., Caremark RX, Inc. and others
Plaintiff: District of Columbia, Janaki Ramados, State of Delaware and others
Movant: Health Care of Delaware, Inc., HealthAssurance of Pennsylvania, McKesson Corporation and others
Notice Only Party: KPMG LLP, Medco Health Solutions, Inc., Public Consulting Group, Inc. and others
919)571-4837 (fax: State of North Carolina
Intervenor Plaintiff: The State of California, United States Of America, the State of Arkansas and others
Unknown: Nicholas Bagley, Meredith Lynn Burrell and Jeanette L. Hamilton
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
United States Of America et al v. DeVry, Inc. et al
as 5:2012cv00843
Defendant: American University of the Caribbean, Chamberlain College of Nursing, DeVry, Inc. and others
Plaintiff: State of North Carolina, State of Minnesota, State of Florida and others
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729

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?