Cases 1 - 5 of 5
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: Engle Cases
as 3:2009cv10000
In Re:
Engle Cases
Special Master:
Michael J. Dewberry, U.S. Attorney A. Lee Bentley, III and Acting U.S. Attorney W. Stephen Muldrow
Plaintiff:
4432 Individual Tobacco Plaintiffs
Defendant:
Various Tobacco Companies, Liggett Group LLC, Vector Group Ltd. and others
Interested Party:
Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, Farah & Farah, P.A. and Motley Rice LLC
Not Classified By Court:
Stephen C. Sawicki, Mediator Michael G. Tanner, John S. Freud and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Schumacker v. BRP US Inc et al
as 1:2019cv00107
Defendant:
Wade A Rice, BRP US Inc, Wade A Rice (Owner) and others
Plaintiff:
Duane Schumacker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
MOTLEY RICE, LLC et al v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION
as 2:2011cv03808
Plaintiff:
MOTLEY RICE, LLC , JOHN DOE and JANE DOE
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Sherwin-Williams Company v. Motley Rice LLC
as 1:2009cv01038
Plaintiff:
Sherwin-Williams Company and Sherwin-Williams Company
Defendant:
Motley Rice LLC and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 1441 Replevin; Action to recover property
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.
