Cases 1 - 9 of 9
Kessler v. Tri State Motor Transit Co. et al
as 6:2024cv00092
Plaintiff:
Justin D. Kessler
Defendant:
Tri State Motor Transit Co., Daniel Stark, Ruth Green and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Fraud
Peter Seamon v. Governor Joshua Shapiro, et al
as 24-1451
Plaintiff:
PETER R. SEAMON
Defendant:
GOVERNOR JOSHUA D. SHAPIRO, NANCY WALKER, Secretary of Labor & Industry, PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY and others
Qmedtrix Systems Inc v. Genex Services Inc
as 6:2014cv00579
Plaintiff:
Qmedtrix Systems Inc
Defendant:
Genex Services Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330
Obazee v. Genex Holdings, Inc. et al
as 4:2013cv03534
Plaintiff:
Sharon Obazee
Defendant:
Genex Holdings, Inc. and Genex Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Labor/Mgmnt. Relations
Williams v. Genex Services, Inc.
as 1:2013cv01942
Plaintiff:
Nancy A Williams and Sandra Sherman
Defendant:
Genex Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 201 Fair Labor Standards Act
Donald v. Arrowood Indemnity Company et al
as 2:2010cv00227
Defendant:
Arrowood Indemnity Company, Genex Services, Inc. , National Healthcare Resources, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Darlene S. Donald
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
US v. UNUM GROUP
as 09-1606
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES and PATRICK J. LOUGHREN
Defendant - Appellant:
UNUM GROUP, a/k/a Unum Provident Corporation, a/k/a Unum
Defendant:
GENEX SERVICES, INC.
Amicus Curiae:
AMERICAN BENEFITS COUNCIL
:
Nabors Drilling U S A L P v. Genex Services Inc
as 6:2008cv00738
Plaintiff:
Nabors Drilling U S A L P, Nabors Drilling U S A L P and Nabors Drilling U S A L P
Defendant:
Genex Services Inc
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 1:2007cv01532
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
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.
