Cases 1 - 10 of 73
Chapman v. Becton Dickinson and Company et al
as 2:2024cv02474
Defendant:
C R Bard Incorporated, Bard Peripheral Vascular Incorporated, Bard Access Systems Incorporated and others
Plaintiff:
Tyrone Alonzo Chapman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Chapman v. Becton Dickinson and Company et al
as 2:2024cv00651
Plaintiff:
Tina Chapman
Defendant:
Becton Dickinson and Company, C R Bard Incorporated, Bard Access Systems Incorporated and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Scott L. Hultner et al v. Air and Liquid Systems Corporation et al
as 8:2024cv00409
Plaintiff:
Scott L Hultner, Geraldine E Hultner, Scott L. Hultner and others
Petitioner:
Alfa Laval, Inc. (sued indiv. and as sii to DeLaval Separator Company and Sharples Inc.)
Interested Party:
Air & Liquid Systems Corporation, sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Buffalo Pumps, Inc., General Electric Company, IMO INDUSTRIES, INC. (sued individually and as succesor-in-interest to DELAVAL TURBINE, INC.) and others
Defendant:
Paramount Global, Redco Corporation, Air and Liquid Systems Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
Chapman v. Columbia Banking Systems Inc
as 2:2023cv01361
Plaintiff:
Roberto Chapman
Defendant:
Columbia Banking Systems, Inc. and Columbia Banking Systems Inc doing business as Umpqua Bank
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Dennis Rockwell, et al v. ASCO, L.P., et al
as 22-56198
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DENNIS A. ROCKWELL and DAWN ROCKWELL
Defendant / Appellee:
ASCO, L.P., Successor-in-interest to Foster Engineering, FKA ASCO Valve, Inc., FKA ASCO Valve, LLC, FISHER CONTROLS INTERNATIONAL, LLC, FOSTER WHEELER ENERGY CORPORATION and others
Defendant:
AIR AND LIQUID SYSTEMS CORPORATION, sued individually and as successor-in-interest to BUFFALO PUMPS, INC, CRANE CO., sued individually and as successor-in-interest to CHAPMAN VALVE CO, GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY and others
J. D. v. Juul Labs, Inc.
as 22-16695
Not Classified By Court:
In re: JUUL LABS, INC., MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff / Appellee:
J. D., through his parent and natural guardian Nicole Dramis, M. C., through his Parent and Natural Guardian Jeanine Manning, O. V., a minor, through her parent and natural guardian Tanya Viti and others
Defendant / Appellant:
JUUL LABS, INC.
Defendant:
ALTRIA GROUP, INC., PAX LABS, INC., PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC. and others
J. D. v. Hoyoung Huh, et al
as 22-16694
Not Classified By Court:
In re: JUUL LABS, INC., MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff / Appellee:
J. D., through his parent and natural guardian Nicole Dramis, M. C., through his Parent and Natural Guardian Jeanine Manning, O. V., a minor, through her parent and natural guardian Tanya Viti and others
Defendant / Appellant:
HOYOUNG HUH, NICHOLAS PRITZKER and RIAZ VALANI
Defendant:
JUUL LABS, INC., ALTRIA GROUP, INC., PAX LABS, INC. and others
In re: J. D. v. Altria Group, Inc., et al
as 22-16693
Not Classified By Court:
In re: JUUL LABS, INC., MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff / Appellee:
J. D., through his parent and natural guardian Nicole Dramis, M. C., through his Parent and Natural Guardian Jeanine Manning, O. V., a minor, through her parent and natural guardian Tanya Viti and others
Defendant / Appellant:
ALTRIA GROUP, INC., PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES LLC and others
Defendant:
JUUL LABS, INC., PAX LABS, INC., NU MARK LLC and others
Amicus Curiae:
WASHINGTON LEGAL FOUNDATION
Smith v. Howe et al
as 4:2022cv04454
Plaintiff:
Leslie Rosalie Smith
Defendant:
Jackie Howe, Jeanne Harriman, Charles W. Scharf and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
Chapman v. Walmart Inc.
as 2:2022cv00919
Plaintiff:
Cherise Chapman
Defendant:
Walmart Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
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.
