Cases 21 - 28 of 28
Davis v. Boston Scientific Corporation
as 2:2014cv00659
Plaintiff:
Susan L. Davis
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Davies v. Ethicon, Inc.
as 2:2013cv26400
Plaintiff:
Bonnie L. Davies
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. , Johnson & Johnson and C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Davis v. Boston Scientific Corporation
as 2:2013cv21371
Plaintiff:
Lucinda L. Davis
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Davis v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv06806
Plaintiff:
Vivian L. Davis
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc., Ethicon, LLC and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Davis v. Villers et al
as 5:2012cv00048
Plaintiff:
Deandre L. Davis
Defendant:
Scott Villers, Jim Rubenstein and Kim May
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Davis et al v. Rutherford et al
as 2:2009cv00096
Plaintiff:
Mark E. Davis and Tammy L. Davis
Defendant:
Mike Rutherford, Vera McCormick, Rebuild America, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Davis v. McBride
as 6:2007cv00127
Petitioner:
Sammy L. Davis, Sr.
Respondent:
Thomas L. McBride and Thomas L. McBride
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Hardy Storage Company, LLC v. Property Interests Necessary to Conduct Gas Storage Operations in the Oriskany Sandstone Subterranean Geological Formation Beneath Properties Located in Hardy and Hampshire Counties Owned By et al
as 2:2007cv00005
Plaintiff:
Hardy Storage Company, LLC, Hardy Storage Company, LLC and Hardy Storage Company, LLC
Defendant:
Property Interests Necessary to Conduct Gas Storage Operations in the Oriskany Sandstone Subterranean Geological Formation Beneath Properties Located in Hardy and Hampshire Counties Owned By, Mark E. Landis, Julie C. Landis and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 717 Natural Gas Act
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.
