Cases 71 - 80 of 136
Woodmore v. Advance Stores Company, Inc.
as 6:2016cv00057
Plaintiff:
Naomi Woodmore
Defendant:
Advance Stores Company, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2015cv02284
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2015cv02906
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 3:2015cv00016
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
VideoSqope, LLC v. Advance Stores Company, Inc. dba Advance Auto Parts, Inc.
as 6:2015cv00085
Plaintiff:
VideoSqope, LLC
Defendant:
Advance Stores Company, Inc. dba Advance Auto Parts, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 35 U.S.C. § 271
BEHAR et al v. Advance Stores Company, Inc.
as 0:2015cv60090
Plaintiff:
IVETTE BEHAR and MAYER BEHAR
Defendant:
Advance Stores Company, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Fladeland v. Advance Stores Company, Inc.
as 5:2015cv00025
Plaintiff:
Edna Fladeland
Defendant:
Advance Stores Company, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Asbestos Action-Refiled as 1:14-cv-10001
as 1:2014cv02326
Plaintiff:
Donald Maclachlan and Pat Maclachlan
Defendant:
3M, AO Smith Corporation, Advance Stores Company, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 pl Petition for Removal - Product Liability
Maclachlan et al v. 3M et al
as 1:2014cv10001
Defendant:
Zurn Industries, Inc., General Refractories Company, (1 - 100) John Does and others
Plaintiff:
Pat Maclachlan
Cross Claimant:
Oakfabco, Inc. and George V. Hamilton, Inc.
Cross Defendant:
Donald Maclachlan
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446 pl Petition for Removal - Product Liability
Smith v. UNUM Life Insurance Company of America et al
as 6:2014cv04017
Plaintiff:
Charles Smith
Defendant:
UNUM Life Insurance Company of America and Advance Stores Company Inc
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001
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.
