Cases 1 - 8 of 8
HOLLADAY v. KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V. et al
as 2:2023cv01250
Plaintiff:
THOMAS HOLLADAY
Defendant:
KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V., PHILIPS NORTH AMERICA LLC., PHILIPS RS NORTH AMERICA LLC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
HOLLADAY v. ASTRAZENECA LP et al
as 2:2019cv03172
Defendant:
MERCK & CO. INC. D/B/A MERCK, SHARP & DOHME CORPORATION, ASTRAZENECA LP and ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP
Plaintiff:
MARLENE HOLLADAY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
CAMICK v. HOLLADAY et al
as 1:2016cv09013
Plaintiff:
LESLIE L. CAMICK
Defendant:
HARRY R. HOLLADAY, ESQ., EVELYN A. WATTLEY and KAITRAXX L.L.C.
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HOLLADAY v. CIGNA CORPORATION
as 2:2015cv02382
Defendant:
CIGNA CORPORATION and LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA
Plaintiff:
DAVID HOLLADAY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1132
THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA v. HOLLADAY et al
as 2:2007cv05471
Plaintiff:
THE PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA
Defendant:
JAMES HOLLADAY and CHARLES OSBORN, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1335 Interpleader Action
HOLLADAY v. AMCHEM PRODUCTS, INC. et al
as 2:2007cv66639
Plaintiff:
ROBERT EVANS HOLLADAY
Defendant:
AMCHEM PRODUCTS, INC., AMERICAN OPTICAL CORPORATION, CERTAIN TEED CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
HOLLADAY v. AMERICAN STANDARD, INC. et al
as 2:2007cv65634
Plaintiff:
DANIEL C. HOLLADAY
Defendant:
AMERICAN STANDARD, INC., VAPOR, A BRUNSWICK COMPANY, GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
HOLLADAY v. KEENE CORPORATION et al
as 2:2007cv61393
Plaintiff:
EDGAR A HOLLADAY
Defendant:
KEENE CORPORATION, ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED, GAF CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
