Cases 21 - 30 of 1,130
EDWARDS v. INDIVIOR INC et al
as 2:2023cv00467
Defendant:
AQUESTIVE THERAPEUTICS INC, INDIVIOR INC, INDIVIOR PLC and others
Plaintiff:
CHRISTINE EDWARDS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
LEEMAN v. EXACTECH INC
as 2:2024cv00006
Plaintiff:
RONALD LEEMAN
Defendant:
EXACTECH INC and EXACTECH US INC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
DOUGHTY v. SIMPLE PLEASURES LOBSTER INC et al
as 2:2024cv00038
Plaintiff:
JAMES DOUGHTY
Defendant:
SIMPLE PLEASURES LOBSTER INC and GARY HAWKES, JR
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 688 Jones Act
DAVIDSON v. KING
as 2:2023cv00457
Plaintiff:
AMELIA DAVIDSON
Defendant:
ALECSANDER KING
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391 Personal Injury
SOUTHARD et al v. SOUTHARD
as 2:2023cv00437
Plaintiff:
ROBERT A SOUTHARD, JR and JESSICA ANNE CECCHI
Defendant:
DAVID SOUTHARD
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
BUBAR v. WALMART INC
as 1:2023cv00427
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL A BUBAR
Defendant:
WALMART INC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
RANGARAJU v. AMERICAN QUEEN VOYAGES et al
as 2:2023cv00455
Plaintiff:
DINESHRAJ RANGARAJU
Defendant:
AMERICAN QUEEN VOYAGES, ANGLO-EASTERN CRUISE MANAGEMENT INC, HORNBLOWER GROUP INC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1333 Admiralty
SULLIVAN v. NICHOLS et al
as 2:2023cv00402
Plaintiff:
GEORGE E SULLIVAN, II
Defendant:
HARVEY NICHOLS, WIPO and SIR DICKSON POON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
CHAGNON v. TESKE et al
as 2:2023cv00389
Plaintiff:
SARAH M CHAGNON
Defendant:
TEGAN S TESKE, AMANDA N GUNTER and BRENDA S DIEDERICH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
SOSTAK v. DAPRATO et al
as 2:2023cv00376
Plaintiff:
RYAN SOSTAK
Not Classified By Court:
DEREK DAPRATO
Defendant:
DAPRATO FAMILY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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.
