Cases 81 - 90 of 125
Harper v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 2:2012cv00049
Plaintiff:
James W Harper
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Cause Of Action: 45 U.S.C. § 51
Johnson v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 3:2012cv00012
Plaintiff:
Carol Johnson
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company , John Preston and Jane and John Does 1 through 10
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hudson v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 1:2011cv02633
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Plaintiff:
Amber Hudson
Cause Of Action: 45 U.S.C. § 51
Ratcliff v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 2:2011cv01019
Plaintiff:
Robert Ratcliff
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Cause Of Action: 45 U.S.C. § 51
Clausing v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 2:2011cv00964
Plaintiff:
Joshua W. Clausing
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Keller v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 3:2011cv02254
Plaintiff:
Joseph Keller
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Cause Of Action: 45 U.S.C. § 51
Knutti v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 3:2011cv01957
Plaintiff:
James D Knutti
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Cause Of Action: 45 U.S.C. § 51
Williams v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 1:2011cv01948
Plaintiff:
Daniel S. Williams
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Cause Of Action: 45 U.S.C. § 51
Hawkins v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company
as 3:2011cv01036
Plaintiff:
George Hawkins
Defendant:
Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Cause Of Action: 45 U.S.C. § 51
Backus v. Barber Trucking, Inc. et al
as 3:2011cv00976
Plaintiff:
Keith J. Backus
Defendant:
Barber Trucking, Inc., Dennis Fredrick Long and Norfolk Southern Railway Company
Cross_defendant:
Barber Trucking, Inc. and Dennis Fredrick Long
3rd_pty_defendant:
Janell Lyn Campbell
3rd_party_plaintiff:
Dennis Fredrick Long
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
