Bodley v. Revlon, Inc. et al
| Sharon Bodley |
| Revlon, Inc., Revlon Group Holdings LLC, Revlon Consumer Products Corporation, AFAM Concept, Inc. d/b/a JF Labs, Inc., Avlon Industries, L'Oreal USA, Inc., L'Oreal USA Products, Inc., SoftSheen-Carson LLC,, MCBride Research Laboratories, Inc., Luster Products, Inc. and Strength of Nature, LLC |
| 1:2023cv09995 |
| September 12, 2023 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Mary M Rowland |
| Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product 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. (rp, ) |
| Filing 2 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Sharon Bodley by John Joseph Foley (Foley, John) |
| Filing 3 MEMBER CASE OPENED from Northern District of Illinois; ( 1:23-cv-09995 Bodley v. Revlon, Inc. et al / Direct file in ILND). In Re: Hair Relaxer Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation (MDL 3060 ) (jb, ) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Sharon Bodley; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number AILNDC-21052020. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet)(Foley, John) |
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.
