Cases 1 - 10 of 10
GLENDALE ADVENTIST MEDICAL CENTER et al v. XAVIER BECERRA
as 1:2024cv01244
Plaintiff:
GLENDALE ADVENTIST MEDICAL CENTER, SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, CASTLE MEDICAL CENTER and others
Not Yet Classified:
XAVIER BECERRA
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 702 Administrative Procedure Act
Dignity Health, et al v. Will Lightbourne, et al
as 21-16295
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DIGNITY HEALTH, a California non-profit corporation and DIGNITY COMMUNITY CARE, a Colorado non-profit corporation
Plaintiff:
SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, HANFORD COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, FEATHER RIVER HOSPITAL and others
Defendant / Appellee:
WILL LIGHTBOURNE, in his official capacity as the Director of the California Department of Health Care Services, RAUL RAMIREZ, in his official capacity as Chief of the DHCS Office of Health Information Technology, BRUCE LIM, in his official capacity as DHCS Deputy Director of Audits and Investigations Branch; and others
San Joaquin Community Hospital, et al v. Will Lightbourne, et al
as 21-16294
Plaintiff / Appellant:
SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, a California nonprofit reiigious corporation, DBA Adventist Health Bakersfield, HANFORD COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, a Califonria nonprofit religious corporation and as successor in interest to Central Valley General Hospital, fka Central Valley General Hospital, DBA Adventist Health Hanford, FEATHER RIVER HOSPITAL, a Califonria nonprofit religious corporation, DBA Adventist Health Feather River and others
Defendant / Appellee:
WILL LIGHTBOURNE, in his official capacity as the Director of the California Department of Health Care Services, RAUL RAMIREZ, in his official capacity as Chief of the DHCS Office of Health Information Technology, BRUCE LIM, in his official capacity as DHCS Deputy Director of Audits and Investigations Branch; and others
Defendant:
RICHARD FIGUEROA
San Joaquin Community Hospital et al v. Figueroa et al
as 3:2020cv01301
Defendant:
Raul Ramirez, Richard Figueroa, Bruce Lim and others
Plaintiff:
White Memorial Medical Center, Glendale Adventist Medical Center, San Joaquin Community Hospital and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fresno Community Hospital and, et al v. Alex Azar, II
as 19-5254
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Lovelace Health System, Inc., doing business as Lovelace Medical Center - Downtown, Topeka Hospital, LLC, doing business as The University of Kansas Health System, St. Francis Campus, West Valley Medical Center, Inc., doing business as West Valley Medical Center and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Alex Michael Azar, II, Secretary, United States Department of Health and Human Services
Hoag Memorial Hospital, et al v. Tom Price
as 15-56547
Plaintiff - Appellant:
HOSPITAL OF BARSTOW, INC., a Delaware Corporation, WATSONVILLE HOSPITAL CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, HOAG MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PRESBYTERIAN, a California corporation and others
Defendant - Appellee:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS, Secretary of United States Department of Health and Human Services and TOM PRICE, Secretary of United States Department of Health and Human Services
SUTTER HEALTH et al v. SEBELIUS
as 1:2014cv00850
Plaintiff:
SUTTER HEALTH , PARKVIEW MEDICAL CENTER , CHEYENNE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER and others
Defendant:
KATHLEEN SEBELIUS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1395
White Memorial Medical Center v. American Apparel USA et al
as 2:2012cv10855
Defendant:
American Apparel USA LLC and Does
Plaintiff:
White Memorial Medical Center
Hospital of Barstow Inc et al v. Sebelius
as 2:2011cv10638
Plaintiff:
AMI HTI Tarzana Joint Venture, AMISUB Irvine Medical Center, Adventist Health Clearlake Hospital and others
Defendant:
Kathleen Sebelius
Luque et al v. Adventist Health et al
as 2:2008cv01272
Intervenor_plaintiff:
United States of America and State of California
Plaintiff:
Hector Luque and Alejandro Gonzalez
Defendant:
Adventist Health, White Memorial Medical Center and Glendale Adventist Medical Center
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.
