Cases
Cases 71 - 80 of 348
In Re: Bank of New York Mellon Corporation Foreign Exchange Transactions Litigation
as 1:2012md02335
Defendant: Arthur Certosimo, Michael J. Kowalski, Samuel C. Scott, III and others
Plaintiff: Louisiana Municipal Police Employees' Retirement System, Lisa Parker, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Retirement Plan and others
Claimant: Bridgestone Americas, Inc., Bechtel Corporation, SYNNEX Corporation and others
Alternative Dispute Resolution (Adr) Provider: Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund, Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, United States Of America and others
3Rd Party Defendant: Bart Florence, Paul Bensi, Jerry Kalmer and others
Petitioner: Union Asset Management Holding AG, Ironworkers Locals 40, 361 & 417 - Union Security Funds, DeKalb County Pension Fund and others
Interested Party: David Nichols
Nominal Defendant: The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation
Not Classified By Court: Non-Party June Kim
Lead Plaintiff: State of Oregon By and Through the Oregon State Treasurer on Behalf of the Common School Fund and, Together with the Oregon Public Employee Retirement Board, on Behalf of the Oregon Public Employee Re
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Civil Enforcement of Employee Benefits
International Union of Operating Engineers, Stationary Engineers Local 39 Pension Trust Fund v. The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation et al We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 1:2012cv03067
Alternative Dispute Resolution (Adr) Provider: School Employees Retirement System of Ohio, Ohio Police & Fire Pension Fund and Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
Counter Defendant: Paul Bensi, Jerry Kalmar, Lyle Setter and others
Plaintiff: International union of operating engineers, stationary engineers local 39 pension trust fund, MDL Plaintiffs Executive Committee, Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association and others
Defendant: The Bank of New York Mellon, The Bank of New York, The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority v. Portola Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al
as 3:2020cv01501
Defendant: Scott Garland, Mardi C. Dier, John H. Johnson and others
Plaintiff: Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 77
BROOKS v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (SEPTA) et al
as 3:2020cv00143
Defendant: JOHN DOES 1-10 and SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (SEPTA)
Plaintiff: WENDELL BROOKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
ROBERTS et al v. THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al
as 2:2020cv00850
Defendant: JERRY JACKSON, SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY and THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff: LEONARD ROBERTS and GEORGE THOMAS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2671
SAUNDERS v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY et al
as 2:2020cv00706
Plaintiff: STACEY SAUNDERS
Defendant: NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION, CITY OF PHILADELPHIA and SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1348
Plaintiff v. Defendant We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 2:2020cv00756
Defendant: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff: Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
Angelique Jenkins v. SEPTA We have downloadable decisions or orders for this case
as 19-3794
Plaintiff / Appellant: ANGELIQUE JENKINS
Defendant / Appellee: SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Brooks v. SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (SEPTA) et al
as 2:2020cv00143
Defendant: SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (SEPTA) and JOHN DOES 1-10 (fictitious designations)
Plaintiff: Wendell Brooks
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
KARASIK et al v. INFRASOURCE CONSTRUCTION, LLC et al
as 2:2019cv04843
Defendant: QUANTA SERVICES, INC., INFRASOURCE CONSTRUCTION, LLC, INFRASOURCE and others
Plaintiff: LYNN KARASIK and MICHAEL KARASIK
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.


Why Is My Information Online?