Cases filed in New Jersey
Cases 21 - 30 of 124
Arizona, State of v. Optum Incorporated et al
as 2:2024cv00260
Defendant: Evernorth Health Incorporated, Optum Incorporated, OptumRx Incorporated and others
Plaintiff: Arizona, State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal
State of Utah et al v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2024cv00536
Defendant: EVERNORTH HEALTH INC., ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC. and others
Plaintiff: State of Utah, The and Utah Division of Consumer Protection
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Notice of Removal
Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv22917
Defendant: EVERNORTH HEALTH INC., ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC. and others
Plaintiff: Board of County Commissioners of Washington County, Maryland
In Re: INSULIN PRICING LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Henrico County, Virginia v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv23042
Defendant: EVERNORTH HEALTH INC., ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC. and others
In Re: INSULIN PRICING LITIGATION
Plaintiff: Henrico County, Virginia
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
The Board of County Commissioners of St. Mary's County, Maryland v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv23090
Defendant: EVERNORTH HEALTH INC., ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC. and others
In Re: INSULIN PRICING LITIGATION
Plaintiff: The Board of County Commissioners of St. Mary's County, Maryland
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1964 Racketeering (RICO) Act
City of Alexandria, Virginia v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv22769
In Re: INSULIN PRICING LITIGATION
Plaintiff: City of Alexandria, Virginia
Defendant: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC., Evernorth Health, Inc. (Formerly Express Scripts Holding Company) and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
County Board of Arlington County, Virginia v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv22776
Plaintiff: County Board of Arlington County, Virginia
Defendant: ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC., SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S. L.L.C. and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Spokane County v. Eli Lilly and Company et al
as 2:2023cv22847
Defendant: EVERNORTH HEALTH INC., ELI LILLY AND COMPANY, NOVO NORDISK INC. and others
Plaintiff: Spokane County
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1961 Racketeering (RICO) Act
ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION et al v. SMITH, et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2019cv08761
Plaintiff: ROCHE DIABETES CARE, INC. and ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION
Cross Defendant: MERCATO MANAGEMENT, LLC, MERCATO PARTNERS AI II, L.P., KESMAN HUGHES & COMPANY, LLC and others
Defendant: SAHILY PAOLINE, MERCATO PARTNERS GROWTH II, L.P., MERCATO PARTNERS INGRAM CO-INVEST, LLC and others
Cross Claimant: JEFFREY C. SMITH
3Rd Party Plaintiff: ZIONS BANCORPORATION, N.A.
Special Master: THE HONORABLE DENNIS M. CAVANAUGH
Interested Party: Bradley W. Howard and Jeffrey S. Baird
3Rd Party Defendant: EXPRESS SCRIPTS HOLDING COMPANY D/B/A EXPRESS SCRIPTS, CVS CAREMARK, XYZ Corporation Pharmacy Benefit Managers 1-99 and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
LIFESCAN, INC. et al v. SMITH et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2017cv05552
Cross Defendant: SAHILY PAOLINE, STEVEN L. HADLOCK, MERCATO PARTNERS AI II, L.P. and others
Cross Claimant: JEFFREY C. SMITH
Plaintiff: LIFESCAN, INC.
Interested Party: JOHNSON & JOHNSON HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS, INC., Bradley W. Howard and Jeffrey S. Baird
Defendant: GEOFFREY S. SWINDLE, MERCATO MANAGEMENT, LLC, ADAM KOOPERSMITH and others
3Rd Party Plaintiff: ZB, N.A.
Special Master: THE HONORABLE DENNIS M. CAVANAUGH
3Rd Party Defendant: XYZ Corporation Pharmacy Benefit Manger 1-99, PRIME THERAPEUTICS LLC, XYZ Corporation Distributors 1-99 and others
Petitioner: KPMG LLP
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud

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.


Why Is My Information Online?