Cases 1 - 5 of 5
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 8:2021cv01251
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Malica Caldwell v. Macy's Corporate Service, Inc. et al
as 2:2019cv04735
Defendant:
Macy's Corporation Services, Inc., Macy's Systems and Technology, Inc., Macy's West Stores, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Malica Caldwell
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Trustees of The National Elevator Industry Pension, Health Benefit, Educational, Elevator Industry Work Preservation Funds, Elevator Constructors Annuity and 401(K) Retirement Plan v. GMS Elevator Services, Inc. et al
as 2:2018mc00051
Defendant:
GMS Elevator Services, Inc., Gordon Matthew Simpkins and Pamela Simpkins
Plaintiff:
Trustees of The National Elevator Industry Pension, Health Benefit, Educational, Elevator Industry Work Preservation Funds, Elevator Constructors Annuity and 401(K) Retirement Plan
Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Pension, Health Benefit, Educational, Elevator Industry Work Preservation Funds, Elevator Constructors Annuity and 401K Retirement Plan v. Plummers Elevator Service, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv02511
Defendant:
Howard Plummer and Plummers Elevator Service, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Pension, Health Benefit, Educational, Elevator Industry Work Preservation Funds, Elevator Constructors Annuity and 401K Retirement Plan
Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Pension, Health Benefit, Educational, Elevator Industry Work Preservation Funds, Elevator Constructors Annuity and 401K Retirement Plan v. Plummers Elevator Service, Inc. et al
as 2:2013mc00404
Defendant:
Howard Plummer and Plummers Elevator Service, Inc.
Plaintiff:
Trustees of the National Elevator Industry Pension, Health Benefit, Educational, Elevator Industry Work Preservation Funds, Elevator Constructors Annuity and 401K Retirement Plan
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.
