Cases 91 - 100 of 191
Seabolt v. Saltsgaver et al
as 2:2014cv28018
Plaintiff:
Jerry Wayne Seabolt
Defendant:
C. R. Saltsgaver , G. D. Baldwin , T. Boggs and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Boggs v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2015cv04694
Plaintiff:
Deborah Boggs
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PRENTICE v. BOGGS et al
as 1:2015cv00311
Plaintiff:
STEVEN DIXON PRENTICE
Defendant:
LISA BLUE BOGGS and E. MICHAEL SMITH, JR.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Boggs v. American Health and Life Insurance Company
as 8:2015cv01492
Plaintiff:
Diane Boggs
Defendant:
American Health and Life Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Boggs et al v. Harleysville Preferred Insurance Company et al
as 6:2015cv00764
Plaintiff:
Terry Boggs and Vicky Boggs
Defendant:
Harleysville Preferred Insurance Company and Stover Company Inc, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Evans et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al
as 2:2014cv29700
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Plaintiff:
Mary Nell Evans , Lucinda Theobald , Linda Adams and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PRENTICE V. BOGGS ET AL
as 1:2014cv01049
Plaintiff:
STEVEN D. PRENTICE
Defendant:
LISA BLUE BOGGS and MICHAEL SMITH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Prentice v. Boggs et al
as 5:2014ct03285
Plaintiff:
Steven Prentice
Defendant:
Lisa Blue Boggs and Michael Smith
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Washington Group International v. DOWCP
as 14-2136
Petitioner:
WASHINGTON GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INCORPORATED and ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY
Respondent:
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR and FREDDIE BOGGS
Laurel Coal Corporation v. Stevie Boggs
as 14-1821
Petitioner:
LAUREL COAL CORPORATION
Respondent:
STEVIE ALLEN BOGGS and DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
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.
