Cases 81 - 90 of 1,165
Wilson Yachts, LLC v. James Astriku
as 22-1768
Not Classified By Court:
In re: COMPLAINT OF WILSON YACHTS, LLC AS OWNER OF A 38-FOOT SAILING CATAMARAN, KNOWN AS THE S/Y SEVEN DAY WEEKEND OFFICIAL NUMBER 1275474 FOR EXONERATION FROM OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
Plaintiff:
WILSON YACHTS, LLC
Claimant:
JAMES S. ASTRIKU, Individually and as administrator of the estate of Jerry S. Astriku, FELICIA ASTRIKU, nee Felicia Oborgor and JOSEPH ASTRIKU
3Rd Party Defendant:
STEVEN MICHAEL COFFMAN and SAIL AWAY, LLC
Wilson Yachts, LLC v. James Astriku
as 22-1766
Not Classified By Court:
In re: COMPLAINT OF WILSON YACHTS, LLC AS OWNER OF A 38-FOOT SAILING CATAMARAN, KNOWN AS THE S/Y SEVEN DAY WEEKEND OFFICIAL NUMBER 1275474 FOR EXONERATION FROM OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
Plaintiff:
WILSON YACHTS, LLC
Claimant:
FELICIA ASTRIKU, nee Felicia Oborgor, JOSEPH ASTRIKU and JAMES S. ASTRIKU, Individually and as administrator of the estate of Jerry S. Astriku
3Rd Party Defendant:
SAIL AWAY, LLC and STEVEN MICHAEL COFFMAN
In Re Lady Tina Corporation
as 4:2022cv02284
Petitioner:
IN RE LADY TINA CORPORATION, AS OWNER OF THE FISHING VESSEL LADY TINA, FOR EXONERATION FROM OR LIMITATION OF LIABILITY and Lady Tina Corporation
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 30511 Action by Owner for Limitation
Cruz v. Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse Corporation et al
as 4:2022cv00167
Plaintiff:
Alejandra Cruz
Defendant:
Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse Corporation, TRU 2005 RE I, LLC and XYZ Corp. 1-2
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
In re: Law Offices of Ben C. Martin v. Babbitt & Johnson PA, et al
as 22-15872
Not Classified By Court:
In re: BARD IVC FILTERS PRODUCT LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff:
DORIS JONES, GEORGE LEUS, GARY MILTON and others
Appellee:
BABBITT & JOHNSON PA, BARON & BUD, PC, COMMON BENEFIT FEE AND COST COMMITTEE and others
Defendant / Appellee:
C. R. BARD, INC., a New Jersey corporation and BARD PERIPHERAL VASCULAR, INC., a subsidiary and/or Division of defendant C.R. Bard, Inc., an Arizona corporation
Appellant:
LAW OFFICES OF BEN C. MARTIN and MARTIN BAUGHMAN PLLC
Defendant:
CHRISTIAN MOTTAS, CHRISTIANA CARE HEALTH SERVICES, INC., CHRISTIANA CARE HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. and others
In re: Walker County, TX v. OptumRx, Inc., et al
as 22-3491
Not Classified By Court:
In re: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION OPIATE LITIGATION
Plaintiff / Appellant:
WALKER COUNTY, TX
Defendant / Appellee:
OPTUMRX, INC., OPTUMRX ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, LLC, UNITED HEALTHCARE OF TEXAS, INC. and others
Appellee:
PLAINTIFF'S EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE and PLAINTIFFS' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v.$54,563,32 IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY, AS SUBSTITUTE FOR 225 MCCLELLAN ST. PHILA,. PA
as 2:2022cv01714
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
FIFTY-FOUR THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED SIXTY-THREE DOLLARS AND THIRTYTWO CENTS IN UNITED STATES CURRENCY ($54,563.32), AS SUBSTITUTE RES FOR THE REAL PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 225 MCCLELLAN STREET, PH
In re: Leanne Walters, et al v. JPMorgan Chase & Company, et al
as 22-1385
Not Classified By Court:
In re: FLINT WATER CASES
Plaintiff / Appellant:
LEANNE WALTERS, C. B., C. BJ. and others
Defendant / Appellee:
JPMORGAN CHASE & COMPANY, WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. and STIFEL, NICOLAUS & COMPANY, INC.
Desiderio v. BSD CARE AT RE LLC
as 2:2022cv01676
Plaintiff:
Michael Desiderio
Defendant:
BSD CARE AT RE LLC doing business as Rivers Edge Rehabilitation & Healthdcare Center,, Paramount Care Centers, LLC, Abraham Krauss and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
In Re: Procter & Gamble Aerosol Products Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation
as 2:2022md03025
In Re:
In Re: Proctor & Gamble Aerosol Products Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation and In Re: Procter & Gamble Aerosol Products Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation
Plaintiff:
Erik Velasques, Frank Ortega, Matthew Lopez and others
Defendant:
The Procter & Gamble Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
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.
