Cases 41 - 50 of 80
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv02639
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
CHMURA et al v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE et al
as 2:2012cv02108
Plaintiff:
MARK CHMURA , ERIC BASSEY , FAKHIR BROWN and others
Defendant:
NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, NFL PROPERTIES LLC and JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2011cv01490
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
ESTES v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
as 2:2011cv56490
Plaintiff:
LLOYD O. ESTES
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 0688
ESTES v. JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION
as 2:2011cv67482
Plaintiff:
FLORENCE P. ESTES
Defendant:
JOHNS-MANVILLE CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ESTES v. SUPERINTENDENT OF S.C.I.H. et al
as 2:2011cv00690
Petitioner:
RICHARD HASSAIN ESTES
Respondent:
SUPERINTENDENT OF S.C.I.H., ALLEGHENY COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
ESTES et al v. A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST et al
as 2:2011cv32578
Plaintiff:
DAVE A. ESTES , WILLARD E. BARTEL and DAVID C. PEEBLES
Defendant:
A-C PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST, A.P. GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC., ACMC F/K/A NATIONAL GYPSUM COMPANY and others
Cause Of Action: 46 U.S.C. § 688
KEMMERLING v. DIBNER et al
as 5:2010cv07180
Plaintiff:
LARRY KEMMERLING
Defendant:
MICHAEL DIBNER and ESTES EXPRESS LINES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ESTES v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC
as 2:2010cv05152
Plaintiff:
CELIA ESTES
Defendant:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
ESTES et al v. EAGLE-PICHER INDUSTRIES, INC. et al
as 2:2010cv80390
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM ROGERS ESTES and ANN ESTES
Defendant:
EAGLE-PICHER INDUSTRIES, INC., FLINTKOTE, H.K. PORTER COMPANY, INC. and others
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.
