Cases 1 - 10 of 55
SMITH v. FRANKLIN CREDIT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
as 2:2024cv00709
Plaintiff:
AMELIA SMITH
Defendant:
FRANKLIN CREDIT MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 227 Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment
BUDZEL v. FRANKLIN BOROUGH POLICE DEPARTMENT et al
as 2:2024cv00525
Plaintiff:
LUKAS BUDZEL
Defendant:
FRANKLIN BOROUGH POLICE DEPARTMENT, ERIC MOSCHBERGER, GUS PROTOGEROPOULOS and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal
KAO et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 2:2024cv00482
Plaintiff:
JOHN KAO and ANDREY GYUROV
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, THIBAUT MONGON, PAUL RUH and others
KAO et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2024cv00482
Plaintiff:
JOHN KAO and ANDREY GYUROV
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, THIBAUT MONGON, PAUL RUH and others
BERDAN v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 2:2024cv00108
Plaintiff:
RICHARD BERDAN
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, THIBAUT MONGON, PAUL RUH and others
BERDAN v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2024cv00108
Plaintiff:
RICHARD BERDAN, SUSAN K. WILSON, JESSICA BRUCKNER and others
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, THIBAUT MONGON, PAUL RUH and others
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ALDEN LEEDS, INC. et al
as 2:2022cv07326
Plaintiff:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant:
ALDEN LEEDS, INC., ALLIANCE CHEMICAL, INC., ARKEMA, INC. and others
Intervenor Plaintiff:
NOKIA OF AMERICA CORPORATION
Intervenor:
OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION and PASSAIC VALLEY SEWERAGE COMMISSIONERS
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 9607 Real Property Tort to Land
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv18151
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1692
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2021cv18127
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2021cv18160
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1681
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.
