LANDMARK AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY v. WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION et al

Defendant: WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION and EMERSON ELECTRIC COMPANY
Plaintiff: LANDMARK AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
Case Number: 5:2008cv00057
Filed: March 3, 2008
Court: Florida Northern District Court
Office: Panama City Office
County: Bay
0 Judge:
Presiding Judge: RICHARD SMOAK
Referring Judge: ELIZABETH M TIMOTHY
Nature of Suit: Prop. Damage Prod. Liability
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the Florida Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: LANDMARK AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY v. WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: WHIRLPOOL CORPORATION
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 | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: EMERSON ELECTRIC COMPANY
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 | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: LANDMARK AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
Represented By: SAMUEL SOLOMON WOODHOUSE, III
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 | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.