Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Terry v. The Pepsi Bottling Group Inc. Long-Term Disability Plan
as 7:2015cv00007
Plaintiff:
James M. Terry
Defendant:
The Pepsi Bottling Group Inc. Long-Term Disability Plan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Wells v. Pepsi Bottling Group et al
as 7:2010cv00099
Plaintiff:
John Wells
Defendant:
Pepsi Bottling Group and Michael Charles
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Brantley v. The Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc et al
as 3:2009cv00470
Plaintiff:
Ronald L Brantley
Defendant:
The Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc and Sedgwick CMS Claims Administrator
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
Fannin v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al
as 7:2009cv00087
Plaintiff:
Roberta Fannin and Roberta Fannin
Defendant:
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc., Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2008cv12967
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Miller v. Pepsi Bottling Group Long Term Disability Plan
as 7:2008cv00064
Plaintiff:
Bobby Joe Miller
Defendant:
Pepsi Bottling Group Long Term Disability Plan
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1104 Recovery of Benefits to Employee
Kitts v. Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc. et al
as 3:2008cv00083
Plaintiff:
David L. Kitts
Defendant:
Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc., Pepsi Bottling Group, Inc., VPA, Inc and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Scott v. Pepsi Bottling Group et al
as 2:2007cv14700
Plaintiff:
Robert T Scott
Defendant:
Pepsi Bottling Group and International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 337
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Kitchen v. Sedgwick Claims Management Services et al
as 7:2007cv00061
Plaintiff:
Johnny Kitchen
Defendant:
Pepsi Bottling Group Long Term Disability Plan
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
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.
