Cases 81 - 90 of 100
McDonnell et al v. Royal Dutch Shell plc et al
as 1:2013cv07089
Plaintiff:
Kevin McDonnell , Anthony Insinga , Robert Michiels and others
Defendant:
Royal Dutch Shell plc, BP PLC, Statoil ASA and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Chartier v. BP PLC et al
as 1:2013cv05577
Plaintiff:
Christopher Chartier
Defendant:
BP PLC, Royal Dutch Shell, PLC, Statoil ASA and others
Cause Of Action: 7 U.S.C. § 25 Fraud - Commodities Leverage Contracts
Karkut v. Royal Dutch Shell PLC et al
as NYS/1:13-cv-04872
Plaintiff:
William Karkut
Defendant:
Royal Dutch Shell PLC , BP PLC, , Statoil ASA and others
Karkut v. Royal Dutch Shell PLC et al
as 1:2013cv04872
Plaintiff:
William Karkut
Defendant:
Royal Dutch Shell PLC, BP PLC, Statoil ASA and others
Cause Of Action: 07 U.S.C. § 1 Personal Property
White Oaks Fund LP v. BP PLC et al
as 1:2013cv04553
Plaintiff:
White Oaks Fund LP
Defendant:
BP PLC, Royal Dutch Shell plc, Statoil ASA and others
Cause Of Action: 7 U.S.C. § 25 Fraud - Commodities Leverage Contracts
White Oaks Fund LP v. BP PLC et al
as NYS/1:13-cv-04553
Plaintiff:
White Oaks Fund LP
Defendant:
BP PLC , Royal Dutch Shell plc , Statoil ASA and others
Benvenuto v. BP P.L.C. Royal Dutch Shell PLC et al
as 1:2013cv04142
Plaintiff:
Patricia Benvenuto
Defendant:
BP P.L.C. Royal Dutch Shell PLC, Statoil ASA and John Doe Nos. 1-50
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
Benvenuto v. BP P.L.C. Royal Dutch Shell PLC et al
as NYS/1:13-cv-04142
Plaintiff:
Patricia Benvenuto
Defendant:
Statoil ASA , John Doe Nos. 1-50, BP P.L.C. and others
Smith v. BP Plc et al
as 1:2013cv03944
Plaintiff:
Gregory Smith
Defendant:
BP Plc, Royal Dutch Shell plc, Statoil ASA and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Smith v. BP Plc et al
as NYS/1:13-cv-03944
Plaintiff:
Gregory Smith
Defendant:
BP Plc , Royal Dutch Shell plc , Statoil ASA and others
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.
