Cases 41 - 50 of 50
James Walker, Jr. v. Rick Thaler, Director
as 10-20028
Petitioner - Appellant:
JAMES ANDREW WALKER, JR.
Respondent - Appellee:
RICK THALER, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTIONS DIVISION
WALKER v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION
as 2:2008cv05761
Plaintiff:
ANDREW WALKER and ANDREW WALKER
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Walker v. Quarterman
as 4:2008cv03594
Petitioner:
James Andrew Walker, Jr
Respondent:
Nathaniel Quarterman
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Walker v. Covance Clinical Research Unit, Inc. et al
as 3:2008cv00493
Plaintiff:
Andrew Walker
Defendant:
Covance Clinical Research Unit, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Does 1 - 10 and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Walker v. SmithKline Beecham Corporation
as 0:2008cv04928
Plaintiff:
Andrew Walker, Andrew Walker, Andrew Walker and others
Defendant:
SmithKline Beecham Corporation
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 -pip-Diversity-Personal Injury, Product Liability
Walker v. Covance Clinical Research Unit, Inc. et al
as 4:2008cv01117
Plaintiff:
Andrew Walker
Defendant:
Covance Clinical Research Unit, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc. and Does 1-10
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Andrew Walker v. Zurn Industries, Inc.
as PAE/2:08-CV-66706
Plaintiff:
Andrew Walker
Defendant:
Zurn Industries, Inc.
WALKER v. ZURN INDUSTRIES, INC.
as 2:2008cv66706
Plaintiff:
ANDREW WALKER and ANDREW WALKER
Defendant:
ZURN INDUSTRIES, INC.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv01272
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
Patinkin v. City of Bloomington, Indiana et al
as 1:2007cv01113
Plaintiff:
Seth S. Patinkin
Defendant:
City of Bloomington, Indiana, Kevin Bowlen, Carol Jack and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1981 Sex Discrimination
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.
