Cases 1 - 10 of 92
S.S. v. AETNA LIFE INSURANCE et al
as 1:2023cv00429
Plaintiff:
S.S.
Defendant:
AETNA LIFE INSURANCE, GSK MEDICAL PLAN and GLAXOSMITHKLINE
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
Patel v. Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare Holdings (US) LLC et al
as 3:2023cv00248
Plaintiff:
Vaibhavi Patel
Defendant:
Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare Holdings (US) LLC doing business as Haleon US, Inc., Pfizer, Inc. doing business as Pfizer Consumer Healthcare LLC, Wyeth LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
DOBY et al v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE, LLC et al
as 1:2020cv00216
Defendant:
Glenmark Generics, Ltd., Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC and others
Plaintiff:
David Doby and John Doby
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Anthony v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al
as 3:2019cv00628
Defendant:
Chattem, Inc., Sanofi US Services Inc., Pfizer, Inc. and others
Plaintiff:
Mary Anthony
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cox v. Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston et al
as 5:2018cv00213
Plaintiff:
Patsy Cox
Defendant:
Liberty Life Assurance Company of Boston and GlaxoSmithKline LLC Long Term Disability Plan
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
MURRAY v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE
as 1:2017cv01068
Plaintiff:
FRANCES MURRAY
Defendant:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
GRISCIK v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE
as 1:2017cv01071
Plaintiff:
KATHAN GRISCIK
Defendant:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
COLE v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE
as 1:2017cv01070
Plaintiff:
ROBYN COLE
Defendant:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
MARTIN v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE
as 1:2017cv01069
Plaintiff:
KAREN A. MARTIN
Defendant:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
GROSS v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE, LLC
as 1:2017cv00693
Plaintiff:
SARAH L. GROSS
Defendant:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE, LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
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.
