Cases 1 - 10 of 10
CASE NUMBER NOT USED
as 2:2024cv00427
Plaintiff:
Kelly Johnson
Defendant:
C.R. BARD, INC., and Bard Peripheral Vascular Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Corich v. C R Bard Inc
as 2:2023cv01847
Plaintiff:
Sonja Corich
Defendant:
C.R. BARD, INC., and C R Bard Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
McKinley v. Becton Dickinson and Company et al
as 1:2023cv03109
Plaintiff:
Donald Ray McKinley and Adrienne J McKinley
Defendant:
Becton Dickinson and Company, Bard Access Systems, Inc., C.R. Bard, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Stigers v. Davol Inc et al
as 3:2019cv05990
Defendant:
Davol Inc, C.R. Bard Inc and CR Bard Inc
Plaintiff:
Wade Stigers
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Hasson et al v. Davol Inc. et al
as 2:2018cv01534
Defendant:
Davol Inc., C.R. Bard, Inc. and C. R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Kenneth Hasson and Mary Hasson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Moddy v. C.R. Bard, Inc., et al
as 3:2014cv05219
Plaintiff:
Melvin Moddy
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc., Davol, Inc. and John and Jane Does
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jones v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2012cv01271
Plaintiff:
Thomas A Jones, III
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Modrow v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2010cv01310
Plaintiff:
Thelma Modrow
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
EHLKE v. Davol Inc et al
as 2:2010cv00882
Defendant:
Davol Inc and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
David EHLKE
Cause Of Action: No cause code entered
Allison et al v. C.R. Bard Inc et al
as 2:2010cv00189
Plaintiff:
Carl "Skip" Allison, Carl "Skip" Allison, Deborah Allison and others
Defendant:
C.R. Bard Inc, Bard Peripheral Vascular Inc and ABC, DEF, GHI Corporations
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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.
