Cases 1 - 10 of 14
Lee Pappas Body Shop, Inc. et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al
as 3:2020cv00964
Defendant:
Donegal Mutual Insurance Company, Travelers Commercial Insurance Company, State Farm General Insurance Company and others
Plaintiff:
David C. Brosius doing business as Martins Auto Body Works, Inc., Lee Pappas Body Shop, Inc., Whiteford Collision and Refinishing, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Lee Pappas Body Shop, Inc., et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile I, et al
as 15-14179
Plaintiff - Appellant:
LEE PAPPAS BODY SHOP, INC., DAVID C. BROSIUS, d.b.a. Martins Auto Body Works, inc., ART WALKER AUTO SERVICES, INC. and others
Defendant - Appellee:
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY COMPANY, UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION and others
:
SERVICE
Lee Pappas Body Shop, Inc., et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile I, et al
as 15-14179
Not Classified By Court:
SERVICE, WASHINGTON LEGAL FOUNDATION and CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant / Appellee:
LM GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, ESURANCE PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, ELEPHANT INSURANCE COMPANY and others
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WHITEFORD COLLISION AND REFINISHING, INC., ART WALKER AUTO SERVICES, INC., DAVID C. BROSIUS, d.b.a. Martins Auto Body Works, inc. and others
Crawford's Auto Center, Inc. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al
as 6:2014cv06016
Defendant:
Foremost County Mutual Insurance Company, Truck Insurance Exchange, Progressive Paloverde Insurance Company and others
Plaintiff:
Crawford's Auto Center, Inc. and K & M Collision, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0001
Lee Pappas Body Shop, Inc. et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al
as 6:2014cv06019
Defendant:
Donegal Mutual Insurance Company, Travelers Commercial Insurance Company, State Farm General Insurance Company and others
Plaintiff:
Lee Pappas Body Shop, Inc., Whiteford Collision and Refinishing, Inc., David C. Brosius and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0001
Kallemeyn Collision Center, Inc. et al v. 21st Century Centennial Insurance Company et al
as 6:2014cv06011
Defendant:
Affirmative Insurance Company, USAA General Indemnity Company, Esurance Property & Casualty Insurance Company and others
Plaintiff:
S. Danihel Collission, Inc., Knebel Autobody Center, Inc., Kallemeyn Collision Center, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0001
Only One Inc, The et al v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company et al
as 6:2014cv06009
Defendant:
First Acceptance Insurance Company, Inc., Travelers Commercial Insurance Company, ACCC Insurance Company and others
Plaintiff:
McDaniel Enterprises Inc, Henslee Auto Body Inc, Myers Auto Collison Repair Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0001
Alliance of Automotive Service Providers, Inc. et al v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company, et al
as 6:2014cv06008
Defendant:
Donegal Mutual Insurance Company, Travelers Commercial Insurance Company, Progressive Casualty Insurance Company and others
Plaintiff:
L.I.P. Collision, Inc., Nigro's Auto Body, Inc., Kilkeary's Auto Body, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0001
Rodenhouse Body Shop, Inc. et al v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company et al
as 6:2014cv06007
Defendant:
Donegal Mutual Insurance Company, Hanover American Insurance Company, The, Michigan Millers Mutual Insurance Company and others
Plaintiff:
Professional Finish, Inc., Lantagne's Auto Body, LLC, H.D. Way Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 0001
Only One Inc, The et al v. State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company et al
as 2:2014cv02166
Plaintiff:
Only One Inc, The , Homewood Auto Body Specialists Inc , McDaniel Enterprises Inc and others
Defendant:
State Farm Mutual Auto Insurance Company , State Farm Fire and Casualty Company , Allstate Insurance Company and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
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.
