Cases 21 - 30 of 45
GILLEN v. THE BOEING COMPANY et al
as 2:2013cv03118
Plaintiff:
MARILYN GILLEN
Defendant:
THE BOEING COMPANY , FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION, BRAND INSULATIONS, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal
Sproles v. Exide Technologies, Inc. et al
as 3:2012cv00356
Defendant:
Exide Technologies, Inc. and Tyronne Perry
Plaintiff:
Larry Sproles
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2011cv04616
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2011cv00235
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2011cv00235
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv00279
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hoffman et al v. Georgia-Pacific LLC et al
as 2:2010cv14179
Plaintiff:
Andrew Hoffman and Laura Hoffman
Defendant:
Georgia-Pacific, LLC, Exide Technologies, Inc. and Georgia-Pacific Corrugated, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Carlos Pena v. Exide Technologies, Inc. et al
as 2:2010cv01085
Plaintiff:
Carlos Pena
Defendant:
Exide Technologies, Inc., Robert Gault and Does 1 through 100, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrimination
Modesto Granillo v. Exide Technologies, Inc. et al
as 2:2010cv01080
Defendant:
Does, Exide Technologies, Inc. and Robert Gault
Plaintiff:
Modesto Granillo
Exide Technologies Inc. v. Becker Communications, Inc.
as 3:2010cv00071
Plaintiff:
Exide Technologies Inc., Exide Technologies Inc. and Exide Technologies Inc.
Defendant:
Becker Communications, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
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.
