Cases 1 - 10 of 11
LEE v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC et al
as 3:2021cv02274
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC and JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC
Plaintiff:
LAURA LEE
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
STILWELL v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2017cv08639
Plaintiff:
LAURA LEE STILWELL
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON , JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC , IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC. ("IMERYS TALC") and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PAIGE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
as 3:2015cv03570
Plaintiff:
LAURA LEE PAIGE
Defendant:
COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
In Re: Fosamax
as 14-2328
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LAURA LEE HILL
Defendant - Appellee:
MERCK & CO INC
Snider v. Corbett et al
as 4:2013cv01226
Plaintiff:
Joel Snider
Defendant:
Tom Corbett, Kathleen Kane, Linda Kelly and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
HILL v. MERCK, SHARP & DOHME CORP
as 3:2012cv01134
Plaintiff:
LAURA LEE HILL
Defendant:
MERCK, SHARP & DOHME CORP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
ROBINSON et al v. ALLIED SIGNAL, INC. et al
as 2:2011cv64171
Plaintiff:
FREDDIE TALMADGE ROBINSON and LAURA LEE ROBINSON
Defendant:
ALLIED SIGNAL, INC. , CARBORUNDUM COMPANY, INC. , GARLOCK, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
STRANGE et al v. GAF CORPORATION et al
as 2:2011cv62039
Plaintiff:
ROBERT F. STRANGE, JR. and LAURA LEE STRANGE
Defendant:
GAF CORPORATION , ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC. , KEENE CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2010cv05225
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
SHARP v. ASTRUE
as 2:2010cv00910
Plaintiff:
LAURA LEE SHARP
Defendant:
MICHAEL J. ASTRUE
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1383
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.
