Menon v. Merck & Co., Inc. et al

Defendant: Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corporation and Merck & Co., Inc.
Plaintiff: Hari B. Menon
Case Number: 1:2013cv01488
Filed: March 20, 2013
Court: New York Eastern District Court
Office: Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge: John Gleeson
Referring Judge: Viktor V. Pohorelsky
Nature of Suit: Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product 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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Menon v. Merck & Co., Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Merck Sharpe & Dohme Corporation
Represented By: Charles F. Morrow
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: Merck & Co., Inc.
Represented By: Charles F. Morrow
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: Hari B. Menon
Represented By: Matthew J. Sill
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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.