Cases 1 - 10 of 63
MCGLAUN v. DIXON
as 5:2024cv00045
Petitioner:
JOHN EDWARD MCGLAUN
Respondent:
STATE OF FLORIDA and RICKY D DIXON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
STRAYN v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv13953
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWARD STRAYN
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
GIROUX v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv04347
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWARD GIROUX
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
EDWARDS v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv03288
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWARDS
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
NICHOLSON v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv00963
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWARD NICHOLSON
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
ALLEN et al v 3M COMPANY
as 9:2023cv00406
Plaintiff:
ZACKERIE ALLEN, NICHOLAS AMATUZZO, EDWIN AMONG and others
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
JAMES v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv04291
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWARD JAMES, JR.
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
CARROLL v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv01082
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWARD CARROLL
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Kumpf v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv00539
Plaintiff:
John Edward Kumpf
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
LUSK v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv13070
Plaintiff:
JOHN EDWARD LUSK and JOHN E LUSK, JR
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
