Cases 11 - 18 of 18
GILLEN v. THE BOEING COMPANY et al
as PAE/2:13-cv-03118
Plaintiff:
MARILYN GILLEN
Defendant:
THE BOEING COMPANY , FOSTER WHEELER CORPORATION, BRAND INSULATIONS, INC. and others
The State of New York et al v. Seneca Foods Corp. et al
as 1:2009cv00032
Plaintiff:
The State of New York and The County of Yates
Defendant:
Seneca Foods Corp., Coach & Equipment Manufacturing Corp., Ferro Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
ZEBROWSKI v. ROHM & HAAS COMPANY et al
as 2:2008cv04161
Plaintiff:
CHUCK ZEBROWSKI
Defendant:
ROHM & HAAS COMPANY, ARKEMA, INC., FERRO CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Anti-trust
MILLER v. ROHM & HAAS CO. et al
as 2:2008cv03701
Plaintiff:
BARTLEY C. MILLER
Defendant:
ROHM & HAAS CO., ARKEMA, INC., FERRO CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
DEFREN v. ROHM & HAAS COMPANY et al
as 2:2008cv03702
Plaintiff:
SHARON DEFREN
Defendant:
ROHM & HAAS COMPANY, ARKEMA, INC, FERRO CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1 Antitrust Litigation
ZEBROWSKI v. ROHM & HAAS COMPANY et al
as 1:2008cv01080
Plaintiff:
CHUCK ZEBROWSKI
Defendant:
ROHM & HAAS COMPANY, ARKEMA, INC., FERRO CORPORATION and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Miller v. Rohm & Hass Co. et al
as 0:2008cv60937
Plaintiff:
Bartley C. Miller
Defendant:
Rohm & Hass Co., Arkema, Inc., Ferro Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
California Department of Toxic Substances Control State of et al v. Archer Daniels Midland Company et al
as 2:2007cv07966
Plaintiff:
California Department of Toxic Substances Control State of, California Department of Toxic Substances Control State of, The California Toxic Substances Control Account and others
Defendant:
Archer Daniels Midland Company, Atlantic Oil Company, Atlantic Richfield Company and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 4332 Environmental Policy - Coop of Agency Reports
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.
