Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Kari Lake, et al v. Bill Gates, et al
as 23-16023
Plaintiff:
KARI LAKE and MARK FINCHEM
Appellant:
ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, Counsel for Plaintiffs
Defendant / Appellee:
BILL GATES, as a member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, CLINT HICKMAN, as a member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, JACK SELLERS, as a member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and others
Defendant:
ADRIAN FONTES, Arizona Secretary of State, MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, REX SCOTT, as a member of the Pima County Board of Supervisors and others
Kari Lake, et al v. Bill Gates, et al
as 23-16022
Plaintiff:
KARI LAKE and MARK FINCHEM
Appellant:
ANDREW D. PARKER, PARKER DANIELS KIBORT, LLC, KURT B. OLSEN and others
Defendant / Appellee:
BILL GATES, as a member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, CLINT HICKMAN, as a member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, JACK SELLERS, as a member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and others
Defendant:
ADRIAN FONTES, Arizona Secretary of State, MARICOPA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, REX SCOTT, as a member of the Pima County Board of Supervisors and others
TGP Communications LLC et al v. Sellers et al
as 2:2022cv01925
Plaintiff:
TGP Communications LLC a Missouri limited liability company doing business as Gateway Pundit and Jordan Conradson
Defendant:
Jack Sellers, Thomas Galvin, Bill Gates and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Kari Lake, et al v. Katie Hobbs, et al
as 22-16413
Plaintiff / Appellant:
KARI LAKE and MARK FINCHEM
Defendant / Appellee:
KATIE HOBBS, Arizona Secretary of State, BILL GATES, as a member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, CLINT HICKMAN, as a member of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors and others
Lake et al v. Hobbs et al
as 2:2022cv00677
Plaintiff:
Kari Lake and Mark Finchem
Defendant:
Kathleen Hobbs, Bill Gates, Clint Hickman and others
Amicus Curiae:
Arizona Republican Party
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
GALVIN v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv75370
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC and others
Plaintiff:
THOMAS GALVIN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
GALVIN v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv68057
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC and others
Plaintiff:
THOMAS GALVIN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Montanez v. City of Syracuse et al
as 6:2016cv00550
Plaintiff:
Maleatra Montanez
Defendant:
City of Syracuse , Chester D. Thompson, Frank L Fowler and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
New York State Rifle and Pisto v. Cuomo
as 14-37
Defendant:
Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney for Erie County, Gerald J. Gill, Chief of Police for the Town of Lancaster, New York and Lawrence Friedman
Amicus Curiae:
State of Kentucky, Law Enforcement Action Network, Empire State Arms Collectors Association, Inc. and others
Plaintiff / Appellee:
William Nojay, Blueline Tactical & Police Supply, LLC, Sportsmen's Association for Firearms Education, Inc. and others
Petitioner:
Second Amendment Foundation, Inc., John Amidon, Reuel A. Todd, Oswego County Sheriff and others
Defendant / Appellant:
Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General of the State of New York, Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor of the State of New York and Joseph A. D'Amico, Superintendent of the New York State Police
New York State Rifle and Pisto v. Cuomo
as 14-36
Amicus Curiae:
John Amidon, State of Delaware, State of Kentucky and others
Defendant:
Frank A. Sedita, III, District Attorney for Erie County
Defendant / Appellee:
Gerald J. Gill, Chief of Police for the Town of Lancaster, New York, Lawrence Friedman, Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor of the State of New York and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Sportsmen's Association for Firearms Education, Inc., Batavia Marine & Sporting Supply, Thomas Galvin and others
Petitioner:
Donald B. Smith, Putnam County Sheriff, Timothy B. Howard, Erie County Sheriff, Barry C. Virts, Wayne County Sheriff and others
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.
