Warren v. AFAM Concept, Inc. d/b/a JF Labs, Inc et al
| Mary Warren |
| AFAM Concept, Inc. d/b/a JF Labs, Inc, Beauty Bell Enterprises LLC f/k/a House of Cheatham, Inc., House of Cheatham LLC, L'Oreal USA, Inc, L'Oreal USA Products, Inc., Revlon Consumer Products Corporation, Revlon Group Holdings LLC, Revlon, Inc., SoftSheen-Carson LLC, and Strength of Nature, LLC |
| 1:2023cv09473 |
| September 11, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Mary M Rowland |
| Personal Inj. Prod. Liability |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Product Liability |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 17, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Mary M. Rowland. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Sheila M. Finnegan. Case assignment: Direct assignment. (ags) |
| MEMBER CASE OPENED from Northern District of Illinois; ( 1:23-cv-09473 Warren v. AFAM Concept, Inc. d/b/a JF Labs, Inc et al / Direct file in ILND). In Re: Hair Relaxer Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation (MDL 3060 ) (ntf, ) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Mary Warren by Buffy K. Martines (Martines, Buffy) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Mary Warren; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-21046315. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Martines, Buffy) |
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 Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
