Cases 61 - 70 of 101
DeWitt v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc. et al
as 4:2013cv03459
Plaintiff:
Timothy A. DeWitt
Defendant:
Foot Locker Retail, Inc. and 1INK.com
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal
John Ghattas v. Foot Locker Retail Inc et al
as 2:2013cv01678
Defendant:
Does and Foot Locker Retail Inc
Plaintiff:
John Ghattas
Stratford Holding, LLC v. Fog Cap Retail Investors LLC, et al
as 12-14926
Plaintiff - Appellant:
STRATFORD HOLDING, LLC
Defendant - Appellee:
FOG CAP RETAIL INVESTORS LLC and FOOT LOCKER RETAIL, INC.
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2012cv61882
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12182 Americans with Disabilities Act
Stratford Holding, LLC v. Fog Cap Retail Investors LLC, et al
as 12-14926
Defendant / Appellee:
FOG CAP RETAIL INVESTORS LLC and FOOT LOCKER RETAIL, INC.
Plaintiff / Appellant:
STRATFORD HOLDING, LLC
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 0:2012cv61835
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Labor
Stratford Holding LLC v. Foot Locker Retail Inc et al
as 5:2012cv00772
Plaintiff:
Stratford Holding LLC
Defendant:
Foot Locker Retail Inc , Fog Cap Retail Investors LLC , Kyser Koncepts Ltd and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Marion v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc.
as 1:2012cv01719
Plaintiff:
Seanetha Marion
Defendant:
Foot Locker Retail, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
In Re: Skechers Toning Shoe Products Liability Litigation
as 3:2011md02308
Plaintiff:
In Re: Skechers Toning Shoe Products Liability Litigation, Melissa Kearnely, Richard Kearnely and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Personal Injury
Fox v. Foot Locker Retail, Inc. et al
as 3:2011cv02805
Plaintiff:
Brandon Fox
Defendant:
Foot Locker Retail, Inc. and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
