Cases 1 - 10 of 20
KING v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2023cv17372
Plaintiff:
ADRIANE KING
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC., LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC and others
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Giron v. King Cable Construction Corporation et al
as 0:2023cv61708
Plaintiff:
Andres Giron
Defendant:
King Cable Construction Corporation and Adrian King
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Labor
v. Giron et al
as 0:2023cv61707
Defendant:
Andres Giron, King Cable Construction Corporation and Adrian King
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 0704 Labor Litigation
Williams v. Hayes et al
as 2:2022cv04023
Plaintiff:
James Williams, IV and James Williams, IV, r
Defendant:
David Hayes, Suzzane Schmidt, Michelle Haney and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. King et al
as 2:2022cv03815
Plaintiff:
James Williams, IV and James Williams, IV, r
Defendant:
Adrian King, Greene Co. Public Def. and John-Jane Does #1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Williams v. King et al
as 2:2022cv03816
Plaintiff:
James Williams
Defendant:
Attorney Adrian King and John-Jane Does #1-10
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
WHITE v. KING et al
as 2:2016cv01001
Plaintiff:
CARLOS WHITE
Defendant:
ADRIAN KING, DAVID TYLER, DANIELLE OSMAN and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
MONTGOMERY v. IZZULINO et al
as 2:2016cv00789
Plaintiff:
PRICE MONTGOMERY
Defendant:
ROBERT IZZULINO, JUSTIN CODA, MIKE MOLITARIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
PERRIN v. IUZZOLINO et al
as 2:2016cv00791
Plaintiff:
JAMES PERRIN
Defendant:
ROBERT IUZZOLINO, MATTHEW TRUESDELL, MIKE MOLITARIS and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981
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.
