Cases 31 - 38 of 38
IN RE: PLAVIX PRODUCT LIABILITY AND MARKETING LITIGATION
as 3:2013cv02418
Plaintiff:
Boyce Glenn, MYRNA PETERS, ROSE JOSEPH and others
Consolidated Plaintiff:
RALPH T. HARDEN, PAMELA L. BEAZLEY, THOMAS E. MAY and others
Defendant:
ANITA ROY, SUSIE FARMER, BEATRICE COFFINO and others
Not Classified By Court:
MILTON BRODY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Wright v. DePuy, Inc. et al
as 3:2012cv02033
Plaintiff:
Charles Wright
Defendant:
DePuy, Inc. , DePuy Orthopaedics Inc , DePuy International Limited and others
Pecial_master:
Special Master
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
WRIGHT et al v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv41954
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WRIGHT, JR. , WILLARD E. BARTEL and DAVID C. PEEBLES
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
Gibbs v. Skinner et al
as 5:2010cv01404
Plaintiff:
Ernest Gibbs
Defendant:
Charles D Skinner , Charles Wright McGowan , CWright Trucking Inc and others
Intervenor:
Republic Services Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Wright v. Greyhound Lines, Inc. et al
as 1:2010cv03777
Plaintiff:
Charles Wright
Defendant:
Greyhound Lines, Inc. and Carolina Coaches, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Wright et al v. Actavis Totowa, LLC et al
as 2:2009cv01069
Plaintiff:
Charles Wright, Charles Wright, Charles Wright and others
Defendant:
Actavis Totowa, LLC, Actavis Inc., Actavis US and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Wright et al v. Actavis Totowa, LLC et al
as 4:2009cv01671
Plaintiff:
Charles Wright, Charles Wright, Charles Wright and others
Defendant:
Actavis Totowa, LLC, Actavis Inc., Actavis US and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
WRIGHT v. ZURN INDUSTRIES, INC.
as 2:2008cv66808
Plaintiff:
CHARLES WRIGHT and CHARLES WRIGHT
Defendant:
ZURN INDUSTRIES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
