Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Buckle et al v. 3M Company (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, Co) et al
as 2:2023cv04920
Plaintiff:
Larry Buckle, Thomas Clawson, Willie Hunley Jr and others
Defendant:
3M Company (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, Co.), AGC Chemicals Americas Inc, Amerex Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal
Green v. Boston Scientific Corporation et al
as 2:2016cv08254
Plaintiff:
Carolyn Smith Green
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corporation , Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2016cv03266
Plaintiff:
Carolyn Smith
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2016cv00454
Plaintiff:
Carolyn Smith
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith et al v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2015cv09522
Plaintiff:
Carolyn Smith and William D. Smith
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Porst et al v. C. R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv25369
Plaintiff:
Mildred Porst , Beverly Sellers , Myrtle Malcolm and others
Defendant:
C. R. Bard, Inc. , Sofradim Production SAS, Tissue Science Laboratories Limited and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith et al v. Boston Scientific Corporation
as 2:2014cv19250
Plaintiff:
Carolyn Smith and Buddy Smith
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith et al v. C. R. Bard, Inc.
as 2:2013cv24242
Plaintiff:
Carolyn Smith and Fred Smith
Defendant:
C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Harris et al v. A. W. Chesterton Company et al
as 1:2009cv00258
Plaintiff:
Sherry H. Harris and Carolyn Smith
Defendant:
A. W. Chesterton Company, Borg-Warner Morse TEC, Inc., CertainTeed 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.
