Cases 41 - 47 of 47
Hohl et al v. Starks
as 2:2011cv13232
Plaintiff:
Michael Hohl and Jeniene Hohl
Defendant:
Janine Andrea-Theresa Starks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2010cv13938
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental, and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 6, et al v. Patton et al
as 1:2009cv00533
Plaintiff:
International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental, and Reinforcing Iron Workers, Local 6,, Willaim Bohen, Thomas J. Halligan and others
Defendant:
Vaughan Door Center, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
United States of America v. Hohl Industrial Services, Inc. et al
as 1:2008cv00271
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Hohl Industrial Services, Inc. and Safeco Insurance Company of America
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Plaintiff
United States of America for the Use and Benefit of Louis Del Prince & Sons, Inc. v. Hohl Industrial Services, Inc. et al
as 1:2008cv00126
Plaintiff:
United States of America for the Use and Benefit of Louis Del Prince & Sons, Inc.
Defendant:
Hohl Industrial Services, Inc. and Safeco Insurance Company of America
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Plaintiff
International Association of Bridge Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers Local Union No. 6 et al v. Contour Erection and Siding Systems, Inc. et al
as 1:2007cv00215
Plaintiff:
International Association of Bridge Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers Local Union No. 6, William Bohen, Thomas J. Halligan and others
Defendant:
Contour Erection and Siding Systems, Inc. and Mark Patton
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
Finck v. Schriro et al
as 4:2007cv00012
Plaintiff:
Michael E Finck
Defendant:
Thomas Schaff, R Robles, Hohl and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
