Cases 71 - 80 of 344
Slay v. CVS Caremark Corporation
as 1:2014at00681
Defendant:
CVS Caremark Corporation
Plaintiff:
Mark A Slay
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Randolph Guthrie, III v. U.S. Government, et al
as 14-14047
Plaintiff - Appellant:
RANDOLPH H. GUTHRIE, III
Defendant - Appellee:
U.S. GOVERNMENT, CITY OF NEW YORK, CITY OF MIAMI and others
Le v. CVS Caremark Corporation
as 1:2014cv04779
Defendant:
CVS Caremark Corporation
Plaintiff:
Thuy T. Le
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv00979
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101
Crookshank et al v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc. et al
as 4:2014cv02085
Plaintiff:
Jameena Crookshank and Claudis Alston
Defendant:
CVS Pharmacy, Inc. , CVS Caremark Corporation and CVS Pharmacy
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Smith et al v. CVS Caremark Corporation et al
as 1:2014cv04328
Defendant:
CVS Albany, L.L.C., CVS Caremark Corporation, CVS Pharmacy, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Anthony Smith and Webster Thomas
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
RULE 45 SUBPOENAS: TO NON-PARTIES EPSTEIN BECKER & GREEN, P.C. AND EBG ADVISORS, INC
as 1:2014mc00698
Plaintiff:
ANTHONY R. SPAY
Defendant:
CVS CAREMARK CORPORATION, CAREMARK, LLC and SILVERSCRIPT, LLC
Cause Of Action: Motion to Quash Subpoenas
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 4:2014cv01318
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Rosenberg v. Holiday CVS, LLC et al
as 0:2014cv61539
Plaintiff:
Mona Rosenberg
Defendant:
Holiday CVS, LLC , CVS Caremark Corporation, CVS Pharmacy, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Hopkinton Drug, Inc. v. CaremarkPCS, L.L.C. et al
as 1:2014cv12794
Plaintiff:
Hopkinton Drug, Inc.
Defendant:
CaremarkPCS, L.L.C. and CVS Caremark Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Contract Dispute
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.
