Cases 61 - 70 of 1,758
Sewak v. Arvinmeritor, Inc. et al
as 1:2014cv00590
Plaintiff:
Nicholas Sewak
Defendant:
Arvinmeritor, Inc., Asbestos Corporation Ltd. , Bird, Inc. and others
Cross_claimant:
RSCC Wire & Cable L.L.C.
Cross_defendant:
RSCC Wire & Cable L.L.C., Arvinmeritor, Inc., Asbestos Corporation Ltd. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Lockett et al v. AO Smith Corporation et al
as 3:2014cv00379
Defendant:
Air and Liquid Systems Corporation, Burnham LLC, CBS Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
Charles P. Lockett and Dori Lockett
Intervenor:
Hartford Fire Insurance Company, West American Insurance Company, Safeco Insurance Company of America and others
Cross Defendant:
Genuine Parts Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442 Petition for Removal
Marchand et al v. A.W. Chesterton Company et al
as 1:2013cv00790
Plaintiff:
Normand Marchand and Annette Marchand
Defendant:
A.W. Chesterton Company, Asbestos Corporation Ltd., Atlas Turner, Inc. and others
Cross_claimant:
Crane Co. and Oakfabco, Inc.
Cross_defendant:
A.W. Chesterton Company, Asbestos Corporation Ltd., Atlas Turner, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Hasenberg et al v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation et al
as 3:2013cv01325
Defendant:
Air & Liquid Systems Corporation, Cummins Inc., Georgia Pacific, LLC and others
Plaintiff:
William Hasenberg, Jr. and Linda Hasenberg
Cross Defendant:
Kelsey-Hayes Company, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Pneumo Abex LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability
Hager v. Asbestos Corporation LTD. et al
as 3:2013cv01324
Plaintiff:
Thomas Hager
Defendant:
Asbestos Corporation LTD., Atwood & Morrill Company, Inc., Borgwagner Morse Tec, Inc. and others
Cross_claimant:
Crane Company , Georgia Pacific, LLC , Ingersoll-Rand Company and others
Cross_defendant:
Crane Company , Asbestos Corporation LTD., Atwood & Morrill Company, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Resch v. 84 Lumber Company et al
as 1:2013cv08977
Plaintiff:
John Resch
Defendant:
84 Lumber Company, A.O. Smith Corporation, Asbestos Corporation Ltd. and others
Cross_claimant:
Union Carbide Corporation
Cross_defendant:
Union Carbide Corporation, 84 Lumber Company, A.O. Smith Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
Byers et al v. Ameren Corporation et al
as 3:2013cv01299
Plaintiff:
Larry Byers and Delberta Byers
Defendant:
Ameren Corporation, Armstrong International, Inc., Asbestos Corporation LTD. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Genusa v. Asbestos Corporation Ltd., et al
as 3:2013cv00794
Defendant:
Asbestos Corporation, Ltd., Baton Rouge Marine Contractors, Frank Beason, Jr. and others
ThirdParty Plaintiff:
Baton Rouge Marine Contractors, Baton Rouge Marine Contractors, Inc and Baton Rouge Marine Contractors, Inc
Plaintiff:
Louis Genusa, Jr.
ThirdParty Defendant:
International Longshoremen's Association, AFL-CIO, International Longshoremen's Association, AFL-CIO, Local 3033, ILA, AFL-CIO and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Fair Labor Standards
Baldwin v. Ace Hardware Corporation et al
as 1:2013cv01986
Plaintiff:
Paula Baldwin
Defendant:
Ace Hardware Corporation, Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. , Arvinmeritor Inc. and others
Cross_claimant:
Bird Inc.
Cross_defendant:
Ace Hardware Corporation, Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. , Arvinmeritor Inc. and others
Counter_claimant:
Oakfabco Inc.
Counter_defendant:
Oakfabco Inc. , Ace Hardware Corporation, Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
Tallman v. 84 Lumber Company et al
as 1:2013cv01828
Plaintiff:
Jacqueline Tallman
Defendant:
84 Lumber Company , Ace Hardware Corporation, Air & Liquid Systems Corporation and others
Cross_claimant:
Genuine Parts Company , IMO Industries Inc. , SB Decking Inc. and others
Cross_defendant:
Genuine Parts Company , 84 Lumber Company , Ace Hardware Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
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.
