Cases 51 - 57 of 57
Thomas Buzzerd, et al v. Flagship Carwash of Port St Lu, et al
as 09-4332
Plaintiff - Appellant:
THOMAS BUZZERD and KRISTI COURTNEY
Defendant - Appellee:
FLAGSHIP CARWASH OF PORT ST LUCIE INC, U HAUL CO FL and U HAUL CO AZ
Defendant - Non-Participating:
AMERCO and U HAUL INTL INC
Tolliver v. U-Haul Co of Texas
as 2:2009cv00313
Plaintiff:
Larry Tolliver
Defendant:
U-Haul International Inc, U-Haul Center Northside, U-Haul Co of Arizona and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
U-Haul Co. of California et al v. City of Berkeley
as 4:2008cv02313
Plaintiff:
U-Haul Co. of California, U-Haul Co. of California, U-Haul Co. of California and others
Defendant:
City of Berkeley
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
U-Haul Co. of California et al v. Ross et al
as 2:2008mc00011
Plaintiff:
U-Haul Co. of California, U-Haul Co. of California, Amerco Real Estate Company and others
Defendant:
Barry Ross
Cause Of Action: Civil Miscellaneous Case
Type:
Other Statutes
Amerco Real Estate Company v. Estate of Harvey L Grohs and Wilma J Grohs et al
as 2:2007cv01808
Plaintiff:
Amerco Real Estate Company and Amerco Real Estate Company
Defendant:
Estate of Harvey L Grohs and Wilma J Grohs, Larry L Grohs, Riva Grohs Bjorklund and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2007cv00661
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681 Fair Credit Reporting Act
Strong, et al v. U-Haul Co of Mass In, et al
as 1:2003cv00383
Plaintiff:
Christian S Strong and Brian Hunzicker
Defendant:
U-Haul Co of Massachusetts Inc , U-Haul International Inc , Amerco Inc and others
Consol_plaintiff:
Mindy M Swegles
Consol_defendant:
Amerco Inc , ABC Corporation , BCD Corporation and others
Objector:
Fulbright & Jaworski, LLP
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.
