Cases 21 - 28 of 28
Cantor v. FedEx Corporation et al
as 1:2012cv00171
Plaintiff:
Mauricio Cantor
Defendant:
FedEx Corporation , FedEx Freight, Inc. , Fedex Ground Package System, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
U1IT4less, Inc. v. Fedex Corp. et al
as 7:2011cv01713
Plaintiff:
U1IT4less, Inc.
Defendant:
Fedex Corp. , Fedex Corporate Services, Inc. and FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.,
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
U1IT4less, Inc. v. Fedex Corp. et al
as 1:2011cv01713
Plaintiff:
U1IT4less, Inc.
Defendant:
Fedex Corp. , Fedex Corporate Services, Inc. and FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962
Fedex Ground Package System, Inc. et al v. Cellular Network Corp.
as 7:2010cv04455
Plaintiff:
Fedex Ground Package System, Inc. and Fedex Customer Information Services, Inc.
Defendant:
Cellular Network Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Glacier Gallery et al v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc., et al
as 1:2010cv02412
Plaintiff:
Glacier Gallery and I.S.O. Art Ltd.
Defendant:
FedEx Ground Package System, Inc., Art Capital Group and ACG Galleries
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Hensley et al v. Radenko et al
as 7:2009cv08283
Plaintiff:
John Hensley and Antonia Hensley
Defendant:
Dzamic Radenko, Fedex Ground Package System, Inc., John Randolph and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Hensley et al v. Radenko et al
as 1:2009cv08283
Plaintiff:
John Hensley and Antonia Hensley
Defendant:
Dzamic Radenko, Fedex Ground Package System, Inc., John Randolph and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
FedEx Ground Package System, Inc., v. Gusto Enterprises, LLC et al
as 7:2009cv01280
Plaintiff:
FedEx Ground Package System, Inc., and FedEx Ground Package System, Inc.,
Defendant:
Gusto Enterprises, LLC and 81 Holly Hill Lane LLC,
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.
