Cases 11 - 19 of 19
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv00045
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
GOEBEL INSURANCE AGENCY, INC. v. ADT HOLDINGS, INC. et al
as 2:2014cv01306
Plaintiff:
GOEBEL INSURANCE AGENCY, INC.
Defendant:
ADT HOLDINGS, INC., ADT HOLDINGS, LLC and JOHN DOES 1-10
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227
HICKS et al v. DEFENDERS SECURITY COMPANY et al
as 2:2013cv06058
Plaintiff:
NORMAN HICKS and LINDA SCAVELLO
Defendant:
DEFENDERS SECURITY COMPANY , ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC. , ADT SECURITY SYSTEMS NORTHEAST, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Advanced Door Technologies, Inc. et al v. Santore
as 3:2013cv01922
Plaintiff:
Advanced Door Technologies, Inc. , ADT Maintenance & Service Company, Inc. and ADT National Sales, Inc.
Defendant:
Brian Santore
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
STILLMAN v. ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC. et al
as 2:2013cv03079
Plaintiff:
HOLLY SUE STILLMAN
Defendant:
ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC. , ADT SECURITY SERVICES , ADT LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
DUNCAN et al v. BLUE LIGHT SECURITY, INC. et al
as 2:2012cv04350
Plaintiff:
MARK DUNCAN and MICHELLE DUNCAN
Defendant:
BLUE LIGHT SECURITY, INC. and ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC. v. THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO.,
as 2:2012cv02330
Plaintiff:
ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC.
Defendant:
THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ADT SERVICES A.G. et al v. CENCOM, INC. et al
as 2:2009cv00740
Plaintiff:
ADT SERVICES A.G. and ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC.
Defendant:
CENCOM, INC. and RONALD H. CATS
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
BURGESS et al v. ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC.
as 2:2008cv02205
Plaintiff:
JAMES BURGESS and BREON BURGESS
Defendant:
ADT SECURITY SERVICES, INC.
Cause Of Action: Diversity
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.
