Cases 1 - 9 of 9
TURNER v. VESTBERG et al
as 2:2024cv00272
Plaintiff:
JANIS TURNER
Defendant:
HANS VESTBERG, MATTHEW ELLIS, CLARENCE OTIS, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
TURNER v. VESTBERG et al
as 3:2024cv00272
Plaintiff:
JANIS TURNER
Defendant:
HANS VESTBERG, MATTHEW ELLIS, CLARENCE OTIS, JR. and others
Not Yet Classified:
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC. SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
GABEL v. VESTBERG et al
as 3:2024cv00132
Plaintiff:
GERRY GABEL
Defendant:
HANS VESTBERG, MATTHEW ELLIS, CLARENCE OTIS, JR. and others
SARVER v. VESTBERG et al
as 3:2024cv00063
Plaintiff:
WADE SARVER
Defendant:
HANS VESTBERG, MATTHEW ELLIS, CLARENCE OTIS, JR. and others
MOORE v. VESTBERG et al
as 3:2023cv23071
Plaintiff:
COURTNEY MOORE
Defendant:
HANS VESTBERG, MATTHEW ELLIS, CLARENCE OTIS, JR. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Securities Violation
JANKOWSKI v. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC. et al
as 3:2023cv21123
Plaintiff:
ANDREW JANKOWSKI
Defendant:
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., HANS VESTBERG, MATTHEW ELLIS and others
Clervrain v. Anderson et al
as 2:2022cv00076
Plaintiff:
Manetirony Clervrain
Defendant:
Betsy Anderson, Hans Vestberg, Bruce Van Saun and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Kalkstein v. Darden Restaurants, Inc. et al
as 6:2008cv00507
Plaintiff:
Robert Kalkstein
Defendant:
Darden Restaurants, Inc., Clarence Otis, Jr. and C. Bradford Richmond
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 51 Pension Fund v. Darden Restaurants, Inc. et al
as 6:2008cv00388
Plaintiff:
Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 51 Pension Fund, Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 51 Pension Fund, Plumbers and Pipefitters Local 51 Pension Fund and others
Defendant:
Darden Restaurants, Inc., Clarence Otis, Jr. and C. Bradford Richmond
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
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.
