Cases 1 - 10 of 23
Casey v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv00107
Plaintiff:
Chris Casey
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Casey v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv01602
Plaintiff:
Catherine E. Casey
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Casey v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv01229
Plaintiff:
Audra Casey
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Alford v. Beechmont II Leasing Co., LLC et al
as 1:2023cv00063
Plaintiff:
Casey Alford
Defendant:
Beechmont II Leasing Co., LLC doing business as Harrison Healthcare Center, Communicare, Inc., Communicare Healthcare Services, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
Reaves v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2022cv02619
Plaintiff:
Casey Reaves
Defendant:
Davol, Inc., C.R. Bard, Inc., Johnson & Johnson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Casey v. CR Bard Incorporated et al
as 2:2022cv01102
Plaintiff:
Diana Casey
Defendant:
CR Bard Incorporated and Davol Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Casey v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2022cv00216
Plaintiff:
Michael A Casey
Defendant:
CR Bard, Inc., C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Cridebring v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2021cv03532
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Casey Cridebring
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Casey v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2021cv02957
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Hilda Casey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Casey et al v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2021cv01200
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Plaintiff:
THOMAS D. CASEY and Shelly Casey
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
