Cases 81 - 90 of 4,472
Duncan et al v. C. R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv00164
Plaintiff:
Anne Duncan and Brian Duncan
Defendant:
C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Leatherbarrow v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv00138
Plaintiff:
Anne Leatherbarrow
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Connor et al v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv00090
Plaintiff:
Rosemary Ann Connor and Donald James Connor
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
LENTO LAW GROUP, P.C. v. LEWIS et al
as 2:2024cv10031
Plaintiff:
Lento Law Group, P.C.
Defendant:
Ladel Lewis, Linda Ann Pohly, FLORENDA LEE-HALL and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Libel,Assault,Slander
Soto v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv04240
Plaintiff:
Rebecca Anne Soto
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
John Doe, et al v. Dana Nessel, et al
as 23-2097
Plaintiff:
TIM BROWN, JOHN DOE and TIMOTHY RONALD BROWN
Defendant:
ATTORNEY GENERAL DANA NESSEL, ANICA LETICA, ONE COURT OF JUSTICE, Judges and others
Watkins v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
as 3:2023cv01348
Plaintiff:
Leigh Ann Watkins
Defendant:
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
Kathleen Johnson v. Donnie Day, et al
as 23-4011
Plaintiff:
KATHLEEN DIANE JOHNSON
Defendant:
DONNIE DAY, MORGAN STYLES, COLE PIATT and others
Skoda v. Gorman et al.
as 1:2023cv02416
Plaintiff:
James Skoda
Defendant:
Christopher M. Gorman, Alexander M. Cutler, H. James Dallas and others
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2023cv02797
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
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.
