Cases 1 - 7 of 7
VRAKAS v. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION et al
as 2:2017cv00579
Plaintiff:
CARMELO ORTIZ, LEEANN REED, ROBERT MYER and others
Defendant:
DAVID B. BURRITT, UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, MARIO LONGHI and others
Petitioner:
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 237 ADDITIONAL SECURITY BENEFIT FUND, SUPPLEMENTAL FUND FOR HOUSING AUTHORITY EMPLOYEES, WELFARE FUND, AND WELFARE FUND PENSION PLAN, DENNIS COLEMAN, PENSIONED OPERATING ENGINEERS HEALTH AND WELFARE TRUST FUND and others
Consolidated Plaintiff:
KELLEY PAYNE, OKLAHOMA FIREFIGHTERS PENSION AND RETIREMENT SYSTEM, HENRY BIERYLA and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78 m(a) Securities Exchange Act
WATERMAN v. MONMOUTH REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION et al
as 2:2022cv00102
Plaintiff:
MARC WATERMAN
Defendant:
MONMOUTH REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT CORPORATION, KIERAN CONWAY, DANIEL D CRONHEIM and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22 Securities Fraud
HOPKINS v. GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION et al
as 2:2021cv04054
Plaintiff:
MATTHEW HOPKINS
Defendant:
GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION, SCOTT N GREENBERG, TAMAR ELKELES and others
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MISSISSIPPI v. ENDO INTERNATIONAL PLC et al
as 2:2017cv01466
Plaintiff:
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MISSISSIPPI
Defendant:
ENDO INTERNATIONAL PLC , RAJIV KANISHKA LIYANAARCHCHIE DE SILVA , SUKETU P. UPADHYAY and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77
BECHTLE v. GRANT
as 2:2010cv02987
Plaintiff:
LOUIS C. BECHTLE
Defendant:
R. ROBINSON GRANT, III
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 754
ROBINSON v. MEDEFILE INTERNATIONAL, INC.
as 2:2008cv03077
Plaintiff:
ERIK T. ROBINSON
Defendant:
MEDEFILE INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
ROBINSON v. THE CERVELLE GROUP LLC et al
as 2:2008cv01592
Plaintiff:
ERIK T. ROBINSON
Defendant:
THE CERVELLE GROUP LLC, MY VINTAGE BABY, BIOSTEM INC. and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
