Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Scott v. United States Postal Service
as 1:2020cv01292
Defendant:
United States Postal Service
Plaintiff:
Charles B. Scott
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1346
SCOTT-RICHARDSON v. WAL-MART STORE #5103 et al
as 2:2017cv04556
Plaintiff:
YVONNE B. SCOTT-RICHARDSON
Defendant:
WAL-MART STORE #5103 and WAL-MART STORES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
SCOTT et al v. DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. et al
as 1:2015cv05230
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL B. SCOTT and WILHEMENIA SCOTT
Defendant:
DAIICHI SANKYO, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO U.S. HOLDINGS, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO CO., LTD. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SCOTT v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv56615
Plaintiff:
TED B. SCOTT
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
SCOTT v. FOSTER WHEELER ENERGY CORPORATION
as 2:2011cv57983
Plaintiff:
RANDOLPH B SCOTT
Defendant:
FOSTER WHEELER ENERGY CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
SCOTT v. AMERICAN EXPORT ISBRANDTSEN
as 2:2011cv57982
Plaintiff:
RANDOLPH B SCOTT
Defendant:
AMERICAN EXPORT ISBRANDTSEN
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
SCOTT v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST et al
as 2:2011cv32253
Plaintiff:
RALPH B. SCOTT
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST, A. P. GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., ACMC and others
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 688
SCOTT v. GAF CORPORATION et al
as 2:2010cv80126
Plaintiff:
GATSON B. SCOTT
Defendant:
GAF CORPORATION, THE FLINTKOTE COMPANY, ROCKWOOL MANUFACTURING COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SCOTT et al v. W.R. GRACE & COMPANY et al
as 2:2010cv67061
Plaintiff:
LUKE B SCOTT and ALICE M SCOTT
Defendant:
W.R. GRACE & COMPANY and OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SCOTT V. UNITED STATES LINES INC. REORGANIZATION TRUST
as 2:2010cv35179
Plaintiff:
DONALD B. SCOTT
Defendant:
UNITED STATES LINES INC. REORGANIZATION TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 688
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.
