Cases 81 - 90 of 92
HOWARD V US
as 03-1338
Plaintiff-Appellant:
ALFRED WOLFE, BYRON HOWARD, CHARLES D. REVIE and others
Defendant-Appellee:
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DONALD H. RUMSFELD, Secretary of Defense, UNITED STATES and others
ROBINSON V DVA
as 03-7065
Respondent-Cross Appellant:
ANTHONY J. PRINCIPI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs
Claimant-Appellant:
HUGH J. ROBINSON, III
ROBINSON V US
as 02-5154
Plaintiff-Appellant:
BARBARA L. ROBINSON and JAMES G. ROBINSON
Defendant-Appellee:
UNITED STATES
ROBINSON V CANNONDALE CORP
as 02-1338
Defendant-Appellee:
CANNONDALE CORPORATION
CANNONDALE CORPORATION:
Plaintiff-Appellant:
RUSSELL ROBINSON
QUIMBY, et al v. USA
as 1:2002cv00101
Plaintiff:
YOLANDA QUIMBY , BARBARA JEAN CAIN , SANDRA A. CESNIK and others
Defendant:
USA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1491
Type:
Torts - Injury
ROBINSON V US
as 02-5028
Plaintiff-Appellant:
FLORIDA BUSINESSMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC., JAMES T. ROBINSON, FLORIDA BUSINESSMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC. and others
Defendant-Appellee:
UNITED STATES, UNITED STATES, UNITED STATES and others
ROBINSON V FAKESPACE LABS
as 02-1152
Defendant-Appellee:
FAKESPACE LABS, INC., FAKESPACE LABS, INC., FAKESPACE LABS, INC. and others
Plaintiff-Appellant:
ROSA ROBINSON, WILLIAM FREDERICK ROBINSON, WILLIAM HENRY ROBINSON II and others
NIKKEN USA V ROBINSONS-MAY
as 01-1420
Defendant/Cross Appellant:
ACE HARDWARE CORP., AMERICAN DRUG STORES, INC., BED BATH & BEYOND, INC. and others
Defendant-Appellee:
AMES DEPARTMENT STORES, INC., COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, PRICESMART and others
Plaintiff-Appellant:
NIKKEN USA, INC. (aka Nikken, Inc.), NIKKEN USA, INC. (aka Nikken, Inc.) and NIKKEN USA, INC. (aka Nikken, Inc.)
ROBINSON V VA
as 01-3173
Respondent:
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS and DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
Petitioner:
MICHAEL W. ROBINSON, MICHAEL W. ROBINSON and MICHAEL W. ROBINSON
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.
