Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Arbuthnot v. Acuity - CHS, LLC
as 6:2022cv00658
Plaintiff:
Shannon Arbuthnot
Defendant:
Acuity - CHS, LLC f/k/a Comprehensive Health Services, LLC, Acuity - CHS, LLC and Comprehensive Health Services, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Davis et al v. Nagel et al
as 1:2021cv04067
Plaintiff:
Stephen L. Davis and City of St. Clair Shores Police and Fire Retirement System
Defendant:
Vernon J. Nagel, Richard K. Reece, Mark A. Black and others
Public Employees' Retirement v. Acuity Brands Inc., et al
as 20-14283
Defendant / Appellant:
MARK A. BLACK, ACUITY BRANDS INC, RICHARD K. REECE and others
Plaintiff / Appellee:
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MISSISSIPPI, on it's own behalf and on behalf of those similarly situated,
Acuity Brands, Inc., et al v. Public Employees' Retirement
as 20-90018
Petitioner:
MARK A. BLACK, VERNON J. NAGEL, RICHARD K. REECE and others
Respondent:
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF MISSISSIPPI, on it's own behalf and on behalf of those similarly situated
Gray v. Acuity Brands, Inc. et al
as 1:2018cv02141
Plaintiff:
Thaddeus A. Gray , Erste-Sparinvest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m.b.H. and Karen Rehm
Defendant:
Acuity Brands, Inc. , Vernon J. Nagel and Richard K. Reece
Movant:
Thomas Henry and Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
IN RE ACUITY BRANDS, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION
as 1:2018cv02140
Petitioner:
Thomas Henry and Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi
Defendant:
Richard K. Reece, Acuity Brands, Inc., Vernon J. Nagel and others
Plaintiff:
Karen Rehm, Erste-Sparinvest Kapitalanlagegesellschaft m.b.H., Jaheer Asanhussainsyedmohid and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc. v. Bickley et al
as 1:2014mi00032
Plaintiff:
Acuity Brands Lighting, Inc.
Defendant:
Shane Bickley and Michael Robinson
Movant:
Delta T Corporation and Jay Dantzler
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.
