Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Hite v. Reherman
as 1:2020cv00648
Petitioner:
Ronda Hite
Respondent:
M. E. Reherman
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241
Hite v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
as 2:2015cv03238
Plaintiff:
Charles Stephen Hite
Defendant:
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hite v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv14184
Plaintiff:
Gertrude Hite
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hite v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv28141
Plaintiff:
Connie Hite
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. , Ethicon, LLC and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hites et al v. Boston Scientific Corporation
as 2:2013cv08247
Plaintiff:
Deborah G. Hites and Rodney L. Hites
Defendant:
Boston Scientific Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Hite et al v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv04693
Plaintiff:
Deborah J. Hite and James Barnhart
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. , Ethicon, LLC , Johnson & Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Hite et al v. C. R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2012cv09545
Plaintiff:
Judith A. Hite and Henry Hite
Defendant:
C. R. Bard, Inc. , Sofradim Production SAS, Mentor Worldwide LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Hite v. Snodgrass et al
as 6:2009cv01273
Plaintiff:
Rick Leon Hite
Defendant:
C. M. Snodgrass, C. M. Snodgrass, J. S. Pauley and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Hite v. Rubenstein et al
as 2:2009cv00950
Plaintiff:
Craig Hite
Defendant:
James Rubenstein, David Ballard and Sherilli Snyder
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hite v. Rubenstein
as 2:2009cv00778
Plaintiff:
Craig E. Hite
Defendant:
James Rubenstein, David Ballard and Sherilli Snyder
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
