Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Hardy v. Haynes
as 3:2020cv05898
Petitioner:
Richard Jack Hardy
Respondent:
Ron Haynes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2019cv02486
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Board of Trustees of the Sheet Metal Workers Pension Plan of Southern California Arizona and Nevada et al v. Pullen Associates Inc et al
as 2:2012cv07625
Defendant:
Nelson Algaze, Richard Jack Pullen, Pullen Associates Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Board of Trustees of the Sheet Metal Industry Fund of Los Angeles, Board of Trustees of the Sheet Metal Workers Health Plan of Southern California Arizona and Nevada, Board of Trustees of the Sheet Metal Workers Local 105 Retiree Health Plan and others
Board of Trustees of the Airconditioning and Refrigeration Industry Health and Welfare Trust Fund et al v. Pullen Associates, Inc. et al
as 8:2012cv00948
Defendant:
Nelson Algaze, Does, Richard Jack Pullen and others
Plaintiff:
Board of Trustees of the Airconditioning and Refrigeration Industry Defined Contribution Retirement Plan, Board of Trustees of the Airconditioning and Refrigeration Industry Health and Welfare Trust Fund, Board of Trustees of the Airconditioning and Refrigeration Industry Retirement Trust Fund and others
Trustees of the Southern California Pipe Trades Health and Welfare Trust Fund et al v. Pullen Associates Inc et al
as 2:2012cv01555
Defendant:
Richard Jack Pullen and Pullen Associates Inc
Plaintiff:
Trustees of the Apprentice and Journeyman Training Trust Fund, Trustees of the International Training Fund, Trustees of the Plumbers and Pipefitters National Pension Fund and others
Trustees of the Southern California Pipe Trades Health and Welfare Trust Fund et al v. Pullen Associates Inc et al
as 2:2011cv08503
Defendant:
Richard Jack Pullen and Pullen Associates Inc
Plaintiff:
Trustees of the Apprentice and Journeyman Training Trust Fund, Trustees of the International Training Fund, Trustees of the Plumbers and Pipefitters National Pension Fund and others
Trustees of the Southern California Pipe Trades Health and Welfare Trust Fund et al v. Vision Mechanical Services Inc et al
as 2:2011cv04759
Defendant:
Richard Jack Pullen and Vision Mechanical Services Inc
Plaintiff:
Trustees of the Apprentice and Journeyman Training Trust Fund, Trustees of the International Training Fund, Trustees of the Plumbers and Pipefitters National Pension Fund and others
Trustees of the Southern California Pipe Trades Health and Welfare Trust Fund et al v. Vision Mechanical Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2010cv08356
Defendant:
Richard Jack Pullen and Vision Mechanical Services, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Trustees of the Apprentice and Journeyman Training Trust Fund, Trustees of the International Training Fund, Trustees of the Plumbers and Pipefitters National Pension Fund and others
Trustees of the Southern California Pipe Trades Health and Welfare Trust Fund et al v. Pullen Associates, Inc. et al.
as 2:2009cv03816
Plaintiff:
Trustees of the Southern California Pipe Trades Health and Welfare Trust Fund, Trustees of the Southern California Pipe Trades Health and Welfare Trust Fund, Trustees of the Southern California Pipe Trades Retirement Trust Fund and others
Defendant:
Pullen Associates, Inc. and Richard Jack Pullen
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1145 E.R.I.S.A.
Board of Trustees of the Sheet Metal Workers Pension Plan of Southern California, Arizona and Nevada et al v. Pullen Associates, Inc. et al
as 2:2008cv08381
Plaintiff:
Board of Trustees of The Sheet Metal Workers Local 273 Dues Check Off Fund, Board of Trustees of the Sheet Metal Industry Fund of Los Angeles, Board of Trustees of the Sheet Metal Workers Health Plan of Southern California, Arizona and Nevada and others
Defendant:
Richard Jack Pullen, Robyn Jane Pullen and Pullen Associates, Inc.
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.
