Other Statutes Cases filed in the Third Circuit Courts
Cases 41 - 50 of 57
TENNESSEE GAS PIPELINE COMPANY v. 0.232 ACRES OF LAND IN THE TOWNSHIP OF VERNON, SUSSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY et al
as 2:2010cv04463
Plaintiff: TENNESSEE GAS PIPELINE COMPANY,
Defendant: 0.232 ACRES OF LAND IN THE TOWNSHIP OF VERNON, SUSSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, PHILIP F. GROTTENDICK, KATHY A. GROTTENDICK and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
TENNESSEE GAS PIPELINE COMPANY, v. 0.018 acre ACRES OF LAND IN THE TOWNSHIP OF VERNON, SUSSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2010cv04465
Plaintiff: TENNESSEE GAS PIPELINE COMPANY,
Defendant: 0.018 acre ACRES OF LAND IN THE TOWNSHIP OF VERNON, SUSSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY, HEATHER J. RASO, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717
US LEC COMMUNICATIONS LLC et al v. QWEST COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, LLC We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2010cv04106
Plaintiff: US LEC COMMUNICATIONS LLC , US LEC OF PENNSYLVANIA LLC , US LEC OF VIRGINIA LLC and others
Defendant: QWEST COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
BERGMAN v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2009cv04264
Plaintiff: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA , CALIFORNIA and others
Defendant: ABBOTT LABORATORIES
LONG v. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
as 2:2009cv03640
Plaintiff: VICKY LONG
Defendant: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Movant: AEGIS INSURANCE SERVICES, INC.
Cause Of Action: Motion to Quash
Type: Other Statutes None
PAETEC COMMUNICATIONS, INC. et al v. MCI COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC. D/B/A VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2009cv01639
Plaintiff: PAETEC COMMUNICATIONS, INC., PAETEC COMMUNICATIONS OF VIRGINIA, INC., US LEC COMMUNICATIONS, INC. D/B/A PAETEC BUSINESS SERVICES and others
Defendant: MCI COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES, INC. D/B/A VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1337 Carriage of Goods by Sea Act
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ALLERGAN, INC., ET AL We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2008cv05135
Movant: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff: THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA , THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT , THE STATE OF DELAWARE and others
Defendant: ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP , BIOGEN IDEC, INC. , CEPHALON, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729
In re: Comm Bank N VA, et al, et al
as 08-3790
Plaintiff - Appellant: ALABAMA AND GEORGIA OBJECTING CLASS MEMBERS
Plaintiff - Appellee: REBECCA A. CLARK, a lawfully married couple, ROBERT A. CLARK, a lawfully married couple, RUTH J. DAVIS, a lawfully married couple and others
Defendant - Appellee: FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for Guaranty National Bank of Tennessee, RESIDENTIAL FUNDING CO and PNC BANK NATL ASSOC, successor to CBNV
Defendant: COMM BANK N VA and GRNTY NATL INS CO
In re: Comm Bank N VA
as 08-3791
Plaintiff - Appellee: REBECCA A. CLARK, a lawfully married couple, ROBERT A. CLARK, a lawfully married couple, RUTH J. DAVIS, a lawfully married couple and others
Plaintiff - Appellant: DAVID DAVIDSON, ANTHONY DIXON, KATHY DIXON and others
Defendant - Appellee: FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for Guaranty National Bank of Tennessee, RESIDENTIAL FUNDING CO and PNC BANK NATL ASSOC, successor to CBNV
Defendant: COMM BANK N VA and GRNTY NATL INS CO
In re: Comm Bank N VA
as 08-3857
Plaintiff - Appellee: REBECCA A. CLARK, a lawfully married couple, ROBERT A. CLARK, a lawfully married couple, RUTH J. DAVIS, a lawfully married couple and others
Plaintiff - Appellant: TROY ELLIOTT, LORRAINE OSWALD and RUTH D. MATHIS-WISSEH
Defendant - Appellee: FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for Guaranty National Bank of Tennessee, RESIDENTIAL FUNDING CO and PNC BANK NATL ASSOC, successor to CBNV
Defendant: COMM BANK N VA and GRNTY NATL INS CO

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.


Why Is My Information Online?