Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Melynda Yepez v. Kenneth Appleby et al
as 2:2022cv05501
Plaintiff:
Melynda Yepez
Defendant:
Kenneth Appleby, Southern California Permanente Medical Group and DOES 1-50, inclusive
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
Appleby v. Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company
as 6:2021cv00451
Defendant:
Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company
Plaintiff:
Emma A Appleby
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Appleby v. Orange Lake Country Club, Inc.
as 6:2019cv00201
Plaintiff:
Emma Appleby
Defendant:
Orange Lake Country Club, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 2601
Appleby et al v. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC et al
as 3:2014cv02318
Plaintiff:
Robert Appleby and Winnie Appleby
Defendant:
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC , Cypress Group , John S. Lin and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 623
APPLEBY v. HICKMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
as 1:2012cv00237
Plaintiff:
JONATHAN APPLEBY
Defendant:
HICKMAN CONSTRUCTION INC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Denial of Overtime Compensation
Appleby v. Hickman Construction, Inc. et al
as 5:2011cv00209
Plaintiff:
Richard Appleby
Defendant:
Hickman Construction, Inc. and Donald Hickman
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
APPLEBY v. GOLDBERG et al
as 1:2009cv04549
Plaintiff:
BARBARA APPLEBY
Defendant:
ROBERT M. GOLDBERG, M.D. and ROBERT M. GOLDBERG, M.D., P.A. DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
Keeling v. Rohm & Haas Company
as 3:2007cv00504
Plaintiff:
Eric Keeling, Eric Keeling, Steven Appleby and others
Defendant:
Rohm & Haas Company and Rohm & Haas Company
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Clark et al v. Tip Top Poultry, Inc.
as 1:2007cv01155
Plaintiff:
Christopher Clark, Robin Appleby, Faith Goggins and others
Defendant:
Tip Top Poultry, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 216 (b) Labor - Minimum wage or overtime compensation
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.
