Cases filed in the Third Circuit Courts
Cases 21 - 30 of 136
City of Alexandria, Virginia v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv22769
In Re: INSULIN PRICING LITIGATION
Plaintiff: City of Alexandria, Virginia
Defendant: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC., Evernorth Health, Inc. (Formerly Express Scripts Holding Company) and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
County Board of Arlington County, Virginia v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv22776
Plaintiff: County Board of Arlington County, Virginia
Defendant: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC., SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. L.L.C. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA EX REL LAWRENCE S. KRASNER v. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY et al
as 2:2023cv04645
Plaintiff: COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA EX REL LAWRENCE S. KRASNER
Defendant: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC., SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal
Spokane County v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv22847
Defendant: EVERNORTH HEALTH INC., ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC. and others
Plaintiff: Spokane County
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION et al v. SMITH, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2019cv08761
Plaintiff: ROCHE DIABETES CARE, INC. and ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION
Cross Defendant: MERCATO MANAGEMENT, LLC, MERCATO PARTNERS AI II, L.P., KESMAN HUGHES & COMPANY, LLC and others
Defendant: SAHILY PAOLINE, MERCATO PARTNERS GROWTH II, L.P., MERCATO PARTNERS INGRAM CO-INVEST, LLC and others
Cross Claimant: JEFFREY C. SMITH
3Rd Party Plaintiff: ZIONS BANCORPORATION, N.A.
Special Master: THE HONORABLE DENNIS M. CAVANAUGH
Interested Party: Bradley W. Howard and Jeffrey S. Baird
3Rd Party Defendant: EXPRESS SCRIPTS HOLDING COMPANY D/B/A EXPRESS SCRIPTS, CVS CAREMARK, XYZ Corporation Pharmacy Benefit Managers 1-99 and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
LIFESCAN, INC. et al v. SMITH et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2017cv05552
Cross Defendant: SAHILY PAOLINE, STEVEN L. HADLOCK, MERCATO PARTNERS AI II, L.P. and others
Cross Claimant: JEFFREY C. SMITH
Plaintiff: LIFESCAN, INC.
Interested Party: JOHNSON & JOHNSON HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS, INC., Bradley W. Howard and Jeffrey S. Baird
Defendant: GEOFFREY S. SWINDLE, MERCATO MANAGEMENT, LLC, ADAM KOOPERSMITH and others
3Rd Party Plaintiff: ZB, N.A.
Special Master: THE HONORABLE DENNIS M. CAVANAUGH
3Rd Party Defendant: XYZ Corporation Pharmacy Benefit Manger 1-99, PRIME THERAPEUTICS LLC, XYZ Corporation Distributors 1-99 and others
Petitioner: KPMG LLP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
SCHENECTADY COUNTY, NEW YORK v. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY et al
as 2:2023cv20375
Defendant: EVERNORTH HEALTH, INC., ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC. and others
Plaintiff: SCHENECTADY COUNTY, NEW YORK
In Re: INSULIN PRICING LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
LIVINGSTON COUNTY, NEW YORK v. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY et al
as 2:2023cv18351
Plaintiff: LIVINGSTON COUNTY, NEW YORK
Defendant: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC., SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. LLC and others
In Re: INSULIN PRICING LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
CORTLAND COUNTY, NEW YORK v. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY et al
as 2:2023cv18314
Plaintiff: CORTLAND COUNTY, NEW YORK
Defendant: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC., SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. LLC and others
In Re: INSULIN PRICING LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Pinellas County, Florida v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv21381
Defendant: EVERNORTH HEALTH INC., NOVO NORDISK INC., SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. L.L.C. and others
In Re: INSULIN PRICING LITIGATION
Plaintiff: Pinellas County, Florida
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act

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?