Cases 1 - 10 of 25
THOMAS v. MERCK & CO., INC. et al
as 2:2020cv00435
Defendant:
MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP. and MERCK & CO., INC.
Plaintiff:
JAMES E. THOMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
THOMAS v. SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY
as 2:2015cv00945
Plaintiff:
CHRISTINE E. THOMAS
Defendant:
SEARS ROEBUCK & COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ALDRICH et al v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION et al
as 2:2012cv04864
Plaintiff:
MARIE J. ALDRICH , LEONEL R. ALVAREZ , SARAH ARENSMAN and others
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION and JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 3
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
THOMAS v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv58935
Plaintiff:
CARLOS E. THOMAS
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
THOMAS v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv53361
Plaintiff:
ROBERT E THOMAS
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
EASTERLING et al v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, INC.
as 2:2011cv05209
Plaintiff:
CHARLES RAY EASTERLING , MARY ANN EASTERLING , WAYNE RADLOFF and others
Defendant:
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
THOMAS v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv44793
Plaintiff:
BARBARA E. THOMAS
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
THOMAS v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv40435
Plaintiff:
JOHN E. THOMAS
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
THOMAS v. ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC.
as 2:2011cv64518
Plaintiff:
SUSAN E. THOMAS
Defendant:
ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
THOMAS et al v. KEENE BUILDING PRODUCTS CORPORATION et al
as 2:2011cv64062
Plaintiff:
DONALD E THOMAS and MILDRED THOMAS
Defendant:
KEENE BUILDING PRODUCTS CORPORATION , GAF CORPORATION, CELOTEX CORPORATION and others
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.
