Cases 11 - 19 of 19
Parks et al v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
as 1:2018cv12322
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Parks, Marcus W. Flagg and Matthew Bowden
Defendant:
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1605
Park v. Hari Krishna McFarland, Inc. et al
as 1:2017cv02590
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Park
Defendant:
Hari Krishna McFarland, Inc. and Benjamin Kruke
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Park v. Hari Krishna McFarland, Inc. et al
as 1:2017cv02050
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Park
Defendant:
Hari Krishna McFarland, Inc. and John Doe
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Lebeau v. Garert et al
as 1:2017cv00033
Plaintiff:
Florretta-Amy Lebeau
Defendant:
Louis Garert, Unknown Federal Transport Service, Corey Abram and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lebeau v. Garert et al
as 2:2016cv03015
Plaintiff:
Florretta-Amy Lebeau
Defendant:
Louis Garert, Unknown Federal Transport Service, Corey Abram and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Parks v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2016cv00688
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Parks
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
White v. Parks et al
as 4:2015cv05011
Plaintiff:
Alan White
Defendant:
Wayne Parks , It's Pawsible Dog Training Center and Day Camp and Elizabeth Parks-Ostowski
Counter_claimant:
Elizabeth Parks-Ostowski , Wayne Parks and It's Pawsible Dog Training Center and Day Camp
Counter_defendant:
Alan White
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
Park et al v. Welch Foods Inc.
as 5:2012cv06449
Plaintiff:
Elizabeth Park and Carolyn Otto
Defendant:
Welch Foods Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2301 Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
PARK et al v. AP GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC. et al
as 2:2007cv69507
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM PARK and ELIZABETH PARK
Defendant:
AP GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC., ASBESTOS CLAIMS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
