Cases 61 - 70 of 74
Amendola et al v. Davol, Inc., et al
as 1:2010cv04384
Plaintiff:
Duilio Amendola and Josephine Amendola
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Barrett v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 1:2010cv03246
Plaintiff:
Brenda Barrett
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. , C.R. Bard, Inc. , Joseph Vitello, M.D. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Simms et al v. Herron et al
as 1:2010cv02146
Plaintiff:
Tressa Simms, Robert Simms and Davol Inc.
Defendant:
Burnetta Herron, Robia Byas, Advocate Health Center Family Wellness and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Evans v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 3:2009cv00407
Plaintiff:
Allan Evans
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Respondent:
Rodney Miller, Southern Illinois Healthcare and Marion Hospital Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Dobrydnia v. Davol. Inc. et al
as 1:2008cv07150
Plaintiff:
Dennis J. Dobrydnia
Defendant:
Davol. Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: Diversity
BOWERSOCK et al v. DAVOL, INC. et al
as 1:2008cv01313
Plaintiff:
BOBBY DON BOWERSOCK, CHARLOTTE ROBINSON and MARK BOWERSOCK
Defendant:
DAVOL, INC. and C.R. BARD, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Wrongful Death
Williams v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 3:2008cv50191
Plaintiff:
Cindy Williams
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Housden et al v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 3:2008cv00594
Plaintiff:
Tony Housden and Janice Housden
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Carnehl v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 1:2008cv02381
Plaintiff:
Suzanne M. Carnehl
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc., C.R. Bard, Inc., Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Weis v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 1:2008cv02240
Plaintiff:
Marina Weis
Defendant:
Davol, Inc., Davol, Inc., C.R. Bard Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
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.
