Cases 61 - 70 of 156
HUDSON v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86320
Defendant:
D.B. RILEY, INC., OAKFABCO, INC., JOHN CRANE and others
Plaintiff:
MARY L. HUDSON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
WALKER v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86382
Defendant:
D.B. RILEY, INC., ZURN INDUSTRIES, INC., MORTON INTERNATIONAL, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
MESHONA WALKER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ALEXANDER v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86277
Defendant:
AVENTIS CROPSCIENCE USA, INC., UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, BECHTEL CORPORATION and others
Plaintiff:
LORRAINE H. ALEXANDER
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
WILLIAMS v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86389
Defendant:
EXXON MOBIL CORP., D.B. RILEY, INC., JOHN CRANE and others
Plaintiff:
ROY L. WILLIAMS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
DRISKELL v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86393
Defendant:
JOHN CRANE, D.B. RILEY, INC., OAKFABCO, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
MARIE DRISKELL
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
CANNON v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86395
Defendant:
3M, ZURN INDUSTRIES, INC., VIACOM, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
CHIQUITA CANNON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BEATTY v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86350
Defendant:
D.B. RILEY, INC., UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, OAKFABCO, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
MARY FRANCES BEATTY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SMITH v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86372
Defendant:
3M, D.B. RILEY, INC., JOHN CRANE and others
Plaintiff:
RONALD SMITH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BELTON v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86284
Defendant:
BECHTEL INC. doing business as BECHTEL INC. OF NEVADA also known as C & I GIRDLER COMPANY INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO BECHTEL, INC., ETC., EXXON MOBIL CORP., D.B. RILEY, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
CLEVELAND BELTON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MONCURE v. 3M et al
as 2:2008cv86354
Defendant:
AVENTIS CROPSCIENCE USA, INC., ZURN INDUSTRIES, INC., GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
VERGIE M. MONCURE
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.
