Ohio Torts - Injury Cases
Cases 1 - 10 of 21,640
Sanabria v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 1:2025cv00260
Plaintiff:
Dennis Sanabria
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Garigliano v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 1:2025cv00261
Plaintiff:
Philip Garigliano
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Traficant v. Lowes Home Centers LLC, d/b/a Kobalt Tools
as 4:2025cv00803
Plaintiff:
Alexandria Traficant
Defendant:
Lowes Home Centers LLC, d/b/a Kobalt Tools
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
MILLER v. C.R. BARD, INC.
as 2:2025cv00390
Plaintiff:
Paul Miller
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
WATTS v. C.R. BARD, INC.
as 2:2025cv00383
Plaintiff:
MARY WATTS
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Kohlmayer v. The Home Depot, Inc. et al
as 1:2025cv00216
Plaintiff:
David Kohlmayer
Defendant:
The Home Depot, Inc. and Echo USA, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Harris v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2025cv00308
Plaintiff:
Charles E. Harris
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
Menaldi v. Norfolk Southern Railroad Company
as 4:2025cv00595
Plaintiff:
Arthur T. Menaldi
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railroad Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Clayton v. Zimmer US, Inc. et al
as 2:2025cv00291
Defendant:
Catherine Clayton, Zimmer US, Inc. doing business as Zimmer Biomet, Zimmer Biomet, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability
Scogna et al vs Davol Inc et al
as 2:2025cv00265
Defendant:
Benjamin Scogna, Minerva Scogna, Davol Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
