Search Federal District Court filings
Party Name (optional):
Cases Filed In:
Lawsuit Type:
Show:
Cases Filed:
and

GROSS v. DAHL-CHASE PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES DAHL-CHASE DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLAN et al

 
Case Number:1:2007cv00043
Filed:March 29, 2007
 
Court:Maine District Court
Office:Bangor Office [ Court Info ]
Presiding Judge:JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK JR.
Referring Judge:MAG. JUDGE MARGARET J. KRAVCHUK
 
Nature of Suit:Labor - Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
Cause:29:1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
Jury Demanded By:None
Search for this case: GROSS v. DAHL-CHASE PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES DAHL-CHASE DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLAN et al
Search Blogs[ Justia BlawgSearch | BlawgSearch Google Co-op | Blawg.com | Bloglines | Feedster | Google Blogsearch | Technorati ]
Search News[ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web[ Legal Web | Google | MSN | Yahoo | Ask ]
Search for: GROSS
Search Dockets[ Dockets ]
Search Blogs[ Justia BlawgSearch | BlawgSearch Google Co-op | Blawg.com | Bloglines | Feedster | Google Blogsearch | Technorati ]
Search News[ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance[ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web[ Legal Web | Google | MSN | Yahoo | Ask ]
Search for: DAHL-CHASE PATHOLOGY ASSOCIATES DAHL-CHASE DIAGNOSTIC SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE HEALTH PLAN
Search Dockets[ Dockets ]
Search Blogs[ Justia BlawgSearch | BlawgSearch Google Co-op | Blawg.com | Bloglines | Feedster | Google Blogsearch | Technorati ]
Search News[ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance[ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web[ Legal Web | Google | MSN | Yahoo | Ask ]


The Justia Federal District Court Filings & Dockets site republishes public litigation records retrieved from the US Federal District Courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Justia.