Cases 1 - 8 of 8
Luxottica Group S.p.A. et al v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A"
as 1:2019cv05548
Defendant:
The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A", Anthony Hodges, alexandria holley and others
Plaintiff:
Luxottica Group S.p.A. and Oakley, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125 Trademark Infringement (Lanham Act)
Luxottica Group S.p.A. et al v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A"
as 1:2019cv04200
Defendant:
The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A", Robert Massey, googlejerseys.world and others
Plaintiff:
Luxottica Group S.p.A. and Oakley, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1125
Sean Smith v. Utah Valley University, et al
as 15-1838
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SEAN SMITH
Defendant - Appellee:
UTAH VALLEY UNIVERSITY, GREG SCHWAB, RYAN TANNER and others
SMITH v. UTAH VALLEY UNIVERSITY et al
as 1:2013cv01650
Defendant:
DANIEL MCDONALD, GREG SCHWAB, RYAN TANNER and others
Plaintiff:
SEAN SMITH
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Moon v. City Of Chicago et al
as 1:2013cv05419
Plaintiff:
Robert Moon
Defendant:
City Of Chicago, Chicago Police Department, Paul A Miller and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question
MURPHY v. HARTFORD LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANIES et al
as 1:2010cv01194
Defendant:
HARTFORD EQUITY SALES COMPANY, INC., HARTFORD LIFE AND ANNUITY INSURANCE COMPANIES and DANIEL MCDONALD
Plaintiff:
JOHN A. MURPHY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Account Receivable
Ibarra v. City of Chicago et al
as 1:2010cv04450
Plaintiff:
John Ibarra
Defendant:
City of Chicago, Michael Hillman, Daniel McDonald and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
MCDORMAN et al v. SMITH et al
as 1:2008mc00050
Plaintiff:
KIMBERLY MCDORMAN and JOSEPH PIEKIELKO
Defendant:
KEVIN SMITH, MICHAEL SANCHEZ, DANIEL MCDONALD and others
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.
