St. Charles County, Missouri v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al
St. Charles County, Missouri |
McKesson Corporation, Endo Health Solutions, Inc., Purdue Pharma L.P., Mallinckrodt LLC, Mallinckrodt PLC, Insys Therapeutics, Inc., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd., Allergan PLC, H. D. SMITH HOLDING COMPANY, Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., H. D. SMITH HOLDINGS, LLC, The Perdue Frederick Company, Inc., Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc, Cardinal Health, Inc., Actavis, LLC, Allergan Finance LLC, Actavis Pharma, Inc., Watson Laboratories, Inc., Cephalon, Inc., MIAMI-LUKEN, INC., Walgreens Boots Allliance, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Walmart Inc., Purdue Pharma Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., CVS Health Corporation, Amerisourcebergen Corporation, Riteaid of Maryland, Inc., Noramco, Inc., H. D. Smith, LLC, Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceutica, Inc., The Kroger Co. and The Purdue Frederick Company, Inc. |
4:2018cv01376 |
August 20, 2018 |
US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
St. Louis Office |
St. Charles |
Noelle C Collins |
Personal Injury: Health Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability |
28:1332 |
Plaintiff |
Docket Report
This docket was last retrieved on September 21, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
Document Text |
---|
Filing 6 DISCLOSURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL INTERESTS CERTIFICATE by Defendant Cardinal Health, Inc... (Meyer, Julie) |
![]() |
Filing 4 CONDITIONAL TRANSFER ORDER regarding multidistrict litigation by Clerk of the Panel.(AFC) |
Filing 3 Pursuant to Local Rule 2.08, the assigned/referred magistrate judge is designated and authorized by the court to exercise full authority in this assigned/referred action or matter under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 636 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 3401, including any case budgeting matters. (CSAW) |
Case Opening Notification: 28 Summons(es) issued. The summons were emailed to attorney Sarah S. Burns. All parties must file the Notice Regarding Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction Form consenting to or opting out of the Magistrate Judge jurisdiction. Click #here for the instructions. and all non-governmental organizational parties (corporations, limited liability companies, limited liability partnerships) must file Disclosure of Organizational Interests Certificate # (moed-0001.pdf). Judge Assigned: U.S. Magistrate Judge Noelle C. Collins. (BAK) |
Filing 2 NOTICE OF PROCESS SERVER by Plaintiff St. Charles County, Missouri Process Server: APS International, Ltd. (Burns, Sarah) |
Filing 1 COMPLAINT against defendant All Defendants with receipt number 0865-6704973, in the amount of $400 Jury Demand,, filed by St. Charles County, Missouri. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Civil Cover Sheet, #3 Original Filing Form, #4 Summons Actavis LLC, #5 Summons Actavis Pharma, #6 Summons Allergan Finance, #7 Summons Allergan PLC, #8 Summons Amerisourcebergen, #9 Summons Cardinal Health, #10 Summons Cephalon, #11 Summons CVS, #12 Summons Endo Health Solutions, #13 Summons Endo Pharmaceuticals, #14 Summons Insys, #15 Summons Janssen Pharmaceutica, #16 Summons Janssen Pharmaceuticals, #17 Summons Johnson & Johnson, #18 Summons Mallinckrodt LLC, #19 Summons Mallinckrodt plc, #20 Summons McKesson, #21 Summons Miami-Luken, #22 Summons Noramco, #23 Summons Ortho-McNeil, #24 Summons Purdue Frederick, #25 Summons Purdue Phamra, #26 Summons Purdue Pharma LP, #27 Summons Rite Aid, #28 Summons Kroger, #29 Summons Walgreens, #30 Summons Walmart, #31 Summons Watson)(Burns, Sarah) |
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 Missouri Eastern 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.