Cases 11 - 20 of 40
Dwyer v. BLUE SEA PRODUCTS LLC et al
as 1:2018cv11944
Defendant:
BLUE SEA PRODUCTS LLC and Thomas Jacob
Plaintiff:
James Dwyer
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jacobs v. Crown Equipment Corporation
as 3:2018cv01769
Defendant:
Crown Equipment Corporation and Brakebush Brothers Inc
Plaintiff:
Thomas Jacobs
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Jacobs v. DAVOL INC. et al
as RI/1:18-cv-00191
Plaintiff:
Thomas Jacobs
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Jacobs v. DAVOL INC. et al
as 1:2018cv00191
Plaintiff:
Thomas Jacobs
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Folmar v. Berryhill
as 4:2017cv00126
Plaintiff:
Thomas Jacob Folmar
Defendant:
Nancy A. Berryhill
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
BECK et al v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION et al
as 3:2017cv04314
Plaintiff:
ANDY BECK , AILEEN BECK , HEINZ BUECHI and others
Defendant:
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION , JOHN DOES 1-20 and ABC CORPORATIONS 1-20
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Cooper v. City of New York et al
as 1:2017cv01517
Defendant:
City of New York, Police Lieutenant Thomas Jacobs, NY Police Officers John Does 1-10 and others
Plaintiff:
Steven Cooper
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Civil Rights
MANDRELL et al v. WARDEN
as 2:2016cv00005
Petitioner:
DUSTIN EARL MANDRELL and THOMAS JACOB WELDON
Respondent:
WARDEN
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2241 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (federa
Jacobs et al v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc et al
as 3:2014cv00101
Plaintiff:
Linda D Jacobs and Thomas Jacobs
Defendant:
DePuy Orthopaedics Inc and Premier Orthopaedic Sales Inc
Pecial_master:
Special Master
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Adkins-Rudd et al v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv31850
Plaintiff:
Lillie Adkins-Rudd and Thomas Jacob Rudd
Defendant:
Ethicon, LLC , Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon, Inc.
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.
