Cases 1 - 7 of 7
LEE et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2023cv11496
Plaintiff:
CAROL LEE and THE ESTATE OF RUBY J. LEE
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC., LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC and others
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
LEE v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC. et al
as 3:2020cv11533
Plaintiff:
BETTY J. LEE
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC. and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC.
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
LEE v. ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS LP et al
as 2:2019cv20374
Defendant:
MERCK & CO INC D/B/A MERCK, SHARP & DOHME CORPORATION, ASTRAZENECA LP, THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY and others
Plaintiff:
DONALD J. LEE
In Re:
PROTON-PUMP INHIBITOR PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (No. II)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
PERRY v. DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES et al
as 3:2015cv06923
Plaintiff:
CHALIA PERRY
Defendant:
DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY FAMILY PRESERVATION SERVICES, NONI KENDALL, MARY BROWN and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
LEE v. DAIICHI SANKYO, INC. et al
as 1:2015cv06591
Plaintiff:
ROBERT J. LEE
Defendant:
DAIICHI SANKYO, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO U.S. HOLDINGS, INC., DAIICHI SANKYO CO., LTD. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
LEE et al v. ZIMMER, INC. et al
as 2:2013cv04949
Plaintiff:
REBECCA J. LEE and ROBERT R. LEE
Defendant:
ZIMMER, INC., ZIMMER HOLDINGS, INC. and ZIMMER ORTHOPAEDIC SURGICAL PRODUCTS, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
LEES et al v. MERCK, SHARP & DOHME, CORP.
as 3:2012cv04451
Plaintiff:
BETTY J. LEES
Defendant:
MERCK, SHARP & DOHME, CORP.
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.
