Cases 1 - 10 of 12
Derek Plummer v. Bottling Group, LLC, et al
as 23-7177
Plaintiff:
Derek L. Plummer
Defendant:
Bottling Group, LLC, John Deluca, Shiby Chacko and others
CASE NUMBER NOT USED
as 1:2023cv01931
Plaintiff:
DEREK L. PLUMMER
Defendant:
BOTTLING GROUP, LLC, JOHN DELUCA, SHIBY CHACKO and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
PLUMMER v. BOTTLING GROUP, LLC et al
as 1:2023cv01933
Plaintiff:
DEREK L. PLUMMER
Defendant:
BOTTLING GROUP, LLC, JOHN DELUCA, SHIBY CHACKO and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
Duerte v. MK Simplemart, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv00605
Plaintiff:
Sandra Solis Duerte and Sandra A. Solis Duerte
Defendant:
MK Simplemart, Inc. and Stephen Chacko
Chavez v. AK 22nd., Inc. et al
as 1:2022cv05938
Plaintiff:
Victor Manuel Chavez
Defendant:
AK 22nd., Inc. and Stephen Chacko
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 704 Labor Litigation
United States of America v. Collision Maxx USA Inc et al
as 3:2022cv02191
Plaintiff:
United States of America
Defendant:
Collision Maxx USA Inc., Tonny Chacko, and Jennifer Shipper, Collision Maxx USA Inc, Tonny Chacko and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question
PLUMMER v. BOTTLING GROUP, LLC et al
as 1:2021cv02799
Plaintiff:
DEREK L. PLUMMER
Defendant:
PEPSICO BOTTLING CO., JOHN DELUCA, SHIBY CHACKO and others
Cause Of Action: 05 U.S.C. § 7101
Beckwith et al v. New York City Transit Authority
as 1:2019cv10930
Plaintiff:
Patricia Tarrant, Audrey Charles, Wei Zhao and others
Defendant:
The New York City Transit Authority
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201
Chacko v. AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No. 3
as 2:2019cv01837
Defendant:
AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No. 3
Plaintiff:
Ruby Chacko
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Chacko v. AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No. 3
as 2:2019at00861
Defendant:
AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No. 3
Plaintiff:
Ruby Chacko
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
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.
