Cases 41 - 50 of 1,089
Recinos v. Tire, et al.
as 23-3762
Plaintiff / Appellant:
TIFFANY DION RECINOS
Defendant / Appellee:
DISCOUNT TIRE, BRUCE T. HALLE, Founder of Discount Tire, DEAN MUGULIA, CEO of Discount Tire and others
Shahriar Khazai v. Ruchika Grover et al
as 2:2022cv00100
Defendant:
Anirudh Grover, Ruchika Grover, Ajay Grover and others
Plaintiff:
Shahriar Khazai
Cross Claimant:
Natco Exports PVT Ltd
Cross Defendant:
Imperial Design Group Inc, Soheil Steve Rowshan, Iabela Khazai and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Uber Technologies, Inc., et al. v. United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
as 23-3445
Petitioner:
UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., RASIER, LLC and RASIER-CA, LLC
Respondent:
UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
Not Classified By Court:
JANE DOE LS 340, an individual, KATHERINE HYLIN, an individual, E. R., an individual and others
City of Torrance v. Hi-Shear Corporation
as 2:2017cv07732
Defendant:
Hi-Shear Corporation and Hi-Shear Corporation a Delaware corporation doing business as LISI Aerospace
Plaintiff:
City of Torrance
3Rd Party Defendant:
Pat Simmons Golf Company, EFCO, Inc a Pennsylvania corporation doing business as Erie Press Systems, Craig Frudenfeld and others
Cross Defendant:
Magellan, Middleton, Inc, Karla Frudenfeld, Wendi Frudenfeld and others
Counter Defendant:
Robinson Helicopter Company, Inc. and Robinson Helicopter Company, Incorporated
Counter Claimant:
Esterline Technologies Corporation, Recreational Vans, Inc, Lyman E Eddy Company and others
Cross Claimant:
DASCO Engineering Corporation
Intervenor:
Federal Insurance Company and Safeco Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 6901 Environmental Cleanup Expenses
EBIN New York, Inc. v. SIC Enterprise, Inc.
as 23-7444
Plaintiff / Appellant:
EBIN NEW YORK, INC.
Defendant / Appellee:
SIC ENTERPRISE, INC.
Defendant:
JOHN DOES 1-10, (said names being fictitious), JOHN ROE CORPS. 110, (said names being fictitious), TOM TRADING, LLC and others
Doe v. Effingham Health Systems Foundation, Inc.
as 4:2023cv00287
Plaintiff:
Jane Doe, Janet Roe and Jane Smith
Defendant:
Effingham Health System Foundation, Inc. doing business as Effingham Health System
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal
Borozny et al. v. RTX Corporation, Pratt & Whitney Division, et al
as 3:2021cv01657
Plaintiff:
David Granata, James Rowe, Stephen Dowe and others
Defendant:
Pratt & Whitney, a Division of Raytheon Technologies Corporation, QuEST Global Services-NA, Inc., Belcan Engineering Group, LLC and others
Consolidated Plaintiff:
Tom Conroy, Christopher Novoa, Scott Prentiss and others
Consolidated Defendant:
Belcan LLC, Co-Conspirator, Does 1-50 and others
Amicus Curiae:
American Staffing Association
Interested Party:
United States of America
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15 Antitrust Litigation
Roe, et al. v. Critchfield, et al.
as 23-2807
Plaintiff / Appellant:
REBECCA ROE, by and through her parents and next friends, RYAN ROE, RACHEL ROE and others
Defendant / Appellee:
DEBBIE CRITCHFIELD, in her official capacity as Idaho State Superintendent of Public Instruction, LINDA CLARK, in their official capacities as members of the Idaho State Board of Education, WILLIAM G. GILBERT, JR., in their official capacities as members of the Idaho State Board of Education and others
Doe, et al. v. Horne, et al.
as 23-3188
Plaintiff / Appellee:
HELEN DOE, parent and next friend of Jane Doe, JAMES DOE, parent and next friend of Jane Doe, KATE ROE, parent and next friend of Megan Roe and others
Defendant / Appellee:
THOMAS C. HORNE, in his official capacity as State Superintendent of Public Instruction, LAURA TOENJES, in her official capacity as Superintendent of the Kyrene School District, KYRENE SCHOOL DISTRICT and others
Petitioner / Appellant:
USA WOMEN OF ACTION, doing business as Arizona Women of Action, ANNA VAN HOEK, LISA FINK and others
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.
