Cases 41 - 50 of 489
Arnold Contreras, et al v. ASARCO LLC, et al
as 22-15388
Plaintiff / Appellant:
ARNOLD CONTRERAS, TONY M. MEZA, CHARLES M. ESTRADA and others
Defendant / Appellee:
ASARCO LLC and ASARCO RETIREE MEDICAL PLAN
Not Yet Classified:
LOCAL 627 BOILERMAKERS, IRON SHIPBUILDERS, BLACKSMITH, FORGER AND HELPERS, LOCALS 518,570 AND 602 INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL 518 INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS and others
UNITED STEEL, PAPER AND FORESTRY, RUBBER, MANUFACTURING, ENERGY, ALLIED INDUSTRIAL AND SERVICE WORKERS UNION, AFL-CIO-CLC, LOCAL 8498 v. ARDAGH METAL PACKAGING USA CORP.
as 1:2022cv00142
Plaintiff:
United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers Union, AFL-CIO-CLC, Local 8498
Defendant:
Ardagh Group and ARDAGH METAL PACKAGING USA CORP.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185 Labor/Mgt. Relations (Contracts)
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv06325
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
United Food & Coml Workers, et al v. OSHA
as 21-4094
Not Classified By Court:
In re: MCP NO. 165., OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION RULE ON COVID-19 VACCINATION AND TESTING, 86 FED. REG. 61402
Petitioner:
UNITED FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL/CIO-CLC and AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR-CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
Respondent:
OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
Steven Starcher v. Ameridrives International, et al
as 21-3105
Plaintiff / Appellant:
STEVEN STARCHER
Defendant / Appellee:
AMERIDRIVES INTERNATIONAL, AKA Altra Industrial Motions, AKA Ameridrives Couplings
Defendant:
UNITED STEEL PAPER AND FORESTRY RUBBER MANUFACTURING ALLIED INDUSTRIAL AND SERVICE WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION AFL CIO CLC and UNITED STEEL PAPER AND FORESTRY RUBBER MANUFACTURING ALLIED INDUSTRIAL AND SERVICE WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION AFL CIO CLC LOCAL 3199-10
United Food and Commercial Workers International, et al v. OSHA, et al
as 21-1219
Petitioner:
United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC and American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations
Respondent:
Occupational Safety & Health Administration and United States Department of Labor
United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local No. 7, AFL-CIO v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Colorado et al
as 1:2021cv02767
Plaintiff:
United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local No. 7, AFL-CIO, CLC and United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Local No. 7, AFL-CIO
Counter Claimant:
Kaiser Foundation Health Plan of Colorado
Defendant:
Colorado Permanente Medical Group P.C.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0185 - Labor: Suits By and Against Labor Organizations
IUE-CWA, The Industrial Division of the Communication Workers of America, AFL-CIO, CLC v. GE Appliances
as 3:2021cv00626
Plaintiff:
Local Union No.83761 IUE-CWA, The Industrial Division of the Communication Workers of America, AFL-CIO, CLC and IUE-CWA, The Industrial Division of the Communication Workers of America, AFL-CIO, CLC, Local Union No.83761
Defendant:
GE Appliances
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 0185
United Food and Commercial Wor, et al v. OSHA, et al
as 21-1143
Respondent:
United States Department of Labor and Occupational Safety & Health Administration
Petitioner:
United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, CLC and American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations
United Steel, Paper and Forestry Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC et al v. Tecnocap, LLC
as 5:2021cv00098
Defendant:
Tecnocap, LLC
Plaintiff:
United Steel, Paper and Forestry Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union, AFL-CIO-CLC, Local 152M
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 185
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.
