Cases 31 - 40 of 2,023
CLAY v. CITY OF PHILADELPHIA et al
as 2:2012cv04529
Plaintiff:
JACOB CLAY
Defendant:
CITY OF PHILADELPHIA , CHARLES VALLETTE , KELLER and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MORTON et al v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE et al
as 2:2012cv04087
Plaintiff:
JOHNNIE MORTON , KEZ MCCORVEY , KURT BARBER and others
Defendant:
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE , NFL PROPERTIES LLC , RIDDEL INC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
CLAY v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION et al
as 2:2012cv01747
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION and JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 3
Plaintiff:
ROBERT CLAY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
HAGER et al v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE et al
as 2:2012cv00601
Plaintiff:
BRITT HAGER , BRIDGETTE HAGER , KELLY BANKSTON and others
Defendant:
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, NFL PROPERTIES LLC and JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 100
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
GAMBILL v. ACANDS, INC.
as 5:2011cv54287
Plaintiff:
CLAY GAMBILL, JR.
Defendant:
ACANDS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
CLAY v. MANVILLE CORP ASBESTOS DISEASE COMPENSATION FUND
as 2:2011cv59999
Plaintiff:
HENRY CLAY
Defendant:
MANVILLE CORP ASBESTOS DISEASE COMPENSATION FUND
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv06270
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 451 Employment Discrimination
CLAY v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv42124
Plaintiff:
STANLEY E. CLAY
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
BROWN v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv37324
Plaintiff:
CLAY V. BROWN
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
SAJOUN v. 3M et al
as 2:2011cv66615
Plaintiff:
CLAY JOSEPH SAJOUN
Defendant:
3M, ALLIS CHALMERS CORPORATION PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST, AMERICAN OPTICAL CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
