Cases 61 - 70 of 641
COLEMAN v. SCHNEIDER et al
as 3:2015cv03539
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM COLEMAN
Defendant:
ADAMS SCHNEIDER, JASON ROEBUCK, NICHOLAS ROMANO and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Fassett et al v. Sears Holdings Corporation et al
as 4:2015cv00941
Plaintiff:
Daniel Fassett and Leslie Fassett
Defendant:
Sears Holdings Corporation , Sears, Roebuck and Co. , Sears Hometown and Outlet Stores and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv01478
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
ROY v. SEARS, ROEBUCK & COMPANY et al
as 2:2015cv01061
Plaintiff:
RANDALL ROY
Defendant:
SEARS, ROEBUCK & COMPANY and INNOVEL SOLUTIONS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
KANTNER et al v. SEARS & ROEBUCK, INC.
as 5:2015cv01039
Plaintiff:
DAVID KANTNER and SUNNI KANTNER
Defendant:
SEARS & ROEBUCK, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
THOMAS v. SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY
as 2:2015cv00945
Plaintiff:
CHRISTINE E. THOMAS
Defendant:
SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BROWN v. ROBINSON MALL, INC. et al
as 2:2014cv01715
Plaintiff:
CHRISTOPHER E. BROWN
Defendant:
ROBINSON MALL, INC., J.C. PENNEY PROPERTIES, INC and SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
PAIGE v. SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY
as 2:2014cv06424
Plaintiff:
KARIANN PAIGE
Defendant:
SEARS, ROEBUCK AND COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
CANDLER v. SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO. et al
as 2:2014cv05339
Plaintiff:
DALIENA CANDLER
Defendant:
SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO. and ELECTROLUX
Cross_claimant:
SEARS, ROEBUCK & CO.
Cross_defendant:
ELECTROLUX
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2014cv05331
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
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.
