Cases 1 - 10 of 13
Rose v. Rodriguez et al
as 8:2024cv02281
Plaintiff:
Darrell Rose
Defendant:
Manuel Colon Rodriguez, McFarlane Law / McFarine Doian & Prince and Direct General Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-(Citizenship)
Rose et al v. 3M Company et al
as 0:2024cv03581
Plaintiff:
Darrell Rose and Susan Rose
Defendant:
3M Company and Arizant Healthcare, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 -pip-Diversity-Personal Injury, Product Liability
Rose v. Rodriguez et al
as 3:2024cv00784
Defendant:
McFarlane Law / McFarine Doian & Prince, Manuel Colon Rodriguez and Direct General Insurance Company
Plaintiff:
Darrell Rose
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
ROSE et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2023cv09329
Plaintiff:
DARRELL ROSE and THE ESTATE OF EVA ALMEADA ROSE, DECEASED
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC., LTL MANAGEMENT, LLC and others
In Re:
JOHNSON AND JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Rose et al v. The State of New York et al
as 1:2021cv03164
Plaintiff:
Rose Darrell, Miguel Angel Acosta, Rydell Latta and others
Defendant:
The State of New York, The Department of Correction and The City of New York
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Rose v. USA
as 1:2016cv11226
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Darrell Rose
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Rose v. Field et al
as 1:2014cv08280
Plaintiff:
Darrell Rose
Defendant:
Arnold Field, Billy Pearson, Frank Delgado and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rose v. USA
as 1:2013cv12090
Respondent:
USA
Petitioner:
Darrell Rose
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Darrell Rose v. Tennessee Department of Correc, et al
as 11-6082
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DARRELL ROSE
Defendant - Appellee:
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION, TDOC
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.
