Cases 41 - 50 of 110
SMITH v. FOSTER WHEELER CO.
as 2:2011cv68378
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. SMITH
Defendant:
FOSTER WHEELER CO.
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
SMITH v. MANVILLE CORPORATION ASBESTOS DISEASE COMPENSATION FUND
as 2:2011cv54998
Plaintiff:
JAMES E SMITH
Defendant:
MANVILLE CORPORATION ASBESTOS DISEASE COMPENSATION FUND
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
SMITH v. AMOCO OIL CO.
as 5:2011cv54115
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. SMITH
Defendant:
AMOCO OIL CO.
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
SMITH et al v. FOSTER WHEELER COMPANY
as 5:2011cv39757
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. SMITH and CREIGHTON E MILLER
Defendant:
FOSTER WHEELER COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
JOHNSON et al v. THE HOME DEPOT, INC.
as 2:2011cv03561
Plaintiff:
JEROME A. JOHNSON , RICHARD T. WACKSMAN , MICHELE BOURGEAS and others
Defendant:
THE HOME DEPOT, INC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
JOHNSON et al v. THE HOME DEPOT, INC.
as 3:2011cv03561
Plaintiff:
JEROME A. JOHNSON , RICHARD T. WACKSMAN , MICHELE BOURGEAS and others
Defendant:
THE HOME DEPOT, INC.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
James Smith v. Michelle Ricci, et al
as 11-2521
Plaintiff - Appellant:
JAMES R. SMITH
Defendant - Appellee:
MICHELLE RICCI, Administrator of New Jersey State Prison and PAULA DOW, The Attorney General of the State of New Jersey
SMITH et al v. A C & S, INC et al
as 2:2011cv61733
Plaintiff:
JAMES BURTON SMITH, SR. and MARJORIE SMITH
Defendant:
A C & S, INC , CELOTEX CORP , FIBREBOARD CORP and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
SMITH v. GEORGE W. HILL CORRECTIONAL FACILITY et al
as 2:2010cv06949
Plaintiff:
JAMES R. SMITH, III.
Defendant:
GEORGE W. HILL CORRECTIONAL FACILITY, KEVIN CONROY, E. COURTNEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
SMITH v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2010cv57472
Plaintiff:
JAMES G. SMITH
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY 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.
