Cases 51 - 60 of 1,346
HOWARD v. MOHR et al
as 3:2023cv00063
Plaintiff:
SPRATT HOWARD
Defendant:
MONTY MOHR, WILLIAM C BUSHNELL, JOHN A PURSLEY and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
SMITH v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv14057
Plaintiff:
JAMES LAWRENCE SMITH
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
ESSINGTON et al v. NIEMSYK et al
as 3:2023cv02294
Plaintiff:
Sean A Essington, James P Smith, III, SEAN A. ESSINGTON and others
Defendant:
Eric Niemsyk, Robert Stettner, TOWN OF PHILLIPSBURG, NEW JERSEY and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
SMITH v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv12798
Plaintiff:
JAMES WYATT SMITH, II
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
James Smith v. Rob Jeffreys, et al
as 23-1957
Plaintiff / Appellant:
JAMES H. SMITH
Defendant / Appellee:
ROB JEFFREYS, Director of Illinois Department of Corrections, TARRY WILLIAMS, Warden, Warden, Dixon Correctional Center, WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC. and others
JOHNSON v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv10254
Plaintiff:
STEVEN JOHNSON, SETH LACROIX, IVAN MAY and others
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
SMITH v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv12029
Plaintiff:
JAMES LEE SMITH
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Goodman et al v. 3M Company
as 0:2023cv01380
Plaintiff:
Timothy Goodman, Brandon Koenig-Messer, Ryan Loibl and others
Defendant:
3M Company
Smith v. Elpaso County Mail Employees et al
as 3:2023cv00258
Plaintiff:
James D. Smith
Defendant:
Elpaso County Mail Employees, f/n/u Carr, f/nu McCalister and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
SMITH v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv07255
Plaintiff:
JAMES R SMITH
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
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.
