Cases 31 - 40 of 166
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2012cv02033
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
ConocoPhillips Company v. Macchia
as 4:2012cv01134
Plaintiff:
ConocoPhillips Company
Defendant:
Michael J. Macchia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
ConocoPhillips Company v. Macchia
as 3:2012cv01134
Plaintiff:
ConocoPhillips Company
Defendant:
Michael J. Macchia
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331
ConocoPhillips Company v. Gonzalez et al
as 5:2012cv00576
Plaintiff:
ConocoPhillips Company
Defendant:
Ever Gonzalez and Gonzalez Automotive, LLC
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1051
Mary Elaine Young et al v. 3M Company et al
as 2:2011cv08357
Defendant:
3M Company, Baker Hughes Oilfield Operations Inc, Chevron USA Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Dean Young, Jr, Korinne Young and Mary Elaine Young
John Flores v. Chevron Corporation et al
as 2:2011cv02551
Defendant:
Chevron Corporation, ConocoPhillips Company, Does and others
Plaintiff:
John Flores, III
Edwin Daniel Jones et al v. 3M Company et al
as 2:2010cv08513
Defendant:
3M Company, A.W. Chesterton Company, Borg-Warner Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
Edwin Daniel Jones and Virginia Jones
Barrous et al v. BP P.L.C. et al
as 5:2010cv02944
Plaintiff:
Maria Barrous and Demetrois Barrous
Defendant:
BP P.L.C. , BP Exploration and Oil, Inc. , BP Corporation North America, Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Charles Gulizia v. M/V Polar Enterprise et al
as 2:2010cv04005
Defendant:
ConocoPhillips Company, Does, M/V Polar Enterprise and others
Plaintiff:
Charles Gulizia
California Department of Toxic Substances Control et al v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. et al
as 2:2010cv03378
Defendant:
American Honda Motor Co., Inc., Anadarko E&P Company LP, Atlantic Richfield Company and others
Plaintiff:
California Department of Toxic Substances Control and The California Toxic Substances Control Account
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.
