Cases 61 - 70 of 197
VAN SUMEREN v. ALCOA INC. et al
as 2:2017cv01589
Plaintiff:
THOMAS VAN SUMEREN
Defendant:
ALCOA INC., THE EMPLOYEES' GROUP BENEFIT PLAN OF ALCOA INC., PLAN I AND II. and HIGHMARK BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv05446
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Gillar et al v. Blue Cross/Blue Shield of South Carolina
as 3:2017cv02128
Plaintiff:
Ronald Gillar and Stephanie Gillar
Defendant:
Blue Cross/Blue Shield of South Carolina
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
SHIELDS v. MCGINELY et al
as 2:2017cv05241
Petitioner:
CHARLES SHIELDS
Respondent:
THOMAS MCGINELY, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF THE COUNTY OF _____________ and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF _________
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2017cv04015
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
HIGHMARK BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD WEST VIRGINIA v. JOHNSON et al
as 2:2017cv00786
Plaintiff:
HIGHMARK BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD WEST VIRGINIA
Defendant:
DANIEL JOHNSON and DWAYNE ROSS
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv02360
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2017cv02122
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 621
SHIELDS v. DELBALSO et al
as 2:2017cv01507
Petitioner:
KENNY SHIELDS
Respondent:
DELBALSO and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
JONES v. LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA et al
as 2:2017cv01231
Plaintiff:
IRVING COURTLEY JONES
Defendant:
LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA, ARIA HEALTH CORPORATIONS, PEBTF and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
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.
