Cases 1 - 10 of 579
Sharp v. Agape Baptist Church Inc. et al
as 6:2024cv03068
Plaintiff:
Jordan Sharp
Defendant:
Agape Baptist Church, Inc. doing business as Agape Boarding School and Bryan Clemensen
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle
Tanton et al v. 3M Company
as 0:2023cv00668
Plaintiff:
William Tanton, Mark Bailey, Andrew Ito and others
Defendant:
3M Company
Sharp v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2022cv01810
Plaintiff:
Rauland Sharp
Defendant:
3M Company and Aearo Technologies LLC
Hartle v. Merck & Co., Inc. et al
as 4:2022cv00195
Plaintiff:
ETHAN HARTLE
Defendant:
MERCK & CO., INC., MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP and Merck Sharp & Dohme, Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1407 pl MDL: Products Liability
Prudden v. Merck & Co., Inc. et al
as 5:2022cv06074
Plaintiff:
Christina L Prudden
Defendant:
Merck & Co., Inc. and Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Landrus et al v. Menard, Inc. et al
as 5:2022cv06066
Plaintiff:
Jeffrey Landrus and Stacey Landrus
Defendant:
Menard, Inc. and Merry Sharpe
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Lauderdale v. Organon USA, Inc. et al
as 5:2021cv05200
Plaintiff:
Angela Lauderdale and Addison Cook
Defendant:
Organon USA, Inc., Merck & Co. Inc. and Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Ellison v. Merck & Co Inc et al
as 2:2021cv00133
Plaintiff:
Charlotte Ellison
Defendant:
Merck & Co Inc and Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Andrews et al v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2021cv02143
Plaintiff:
Killian Andrews, Manuel Arevalo, George Ashford and others
Defendant:
3M Company and Aearo Technologies LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Murph et al v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2021cv00387
Plaintiff:
Lewis Murph and Rauland Sharp
Defendant:
Aearo Technologies LLC and 3M Company
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.
