Cases 1 - 10 of 67
Gomez v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02475
Plaintiff:
Charles Gomez
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Gomez v. Davol, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02178
Plaintiff:
Enedina Gomez
Defendant:
Davol, Inc. and C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Gomez v. C.R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2024cv02039
Plaintiff:
Oscar Gomez
Defendant:
C.R. Bard, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Cook v. Federal Bureau of Prisons et al.
as 1:2024cv00727
Plaintiff:
William H. Cook, III
Defendant:
Federal Bureau of Prisons, Colette Peters, Warden David LeMaster and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Gomez v. Indivior Inc. et al.
as 1:2024sf65097
Plaintiff:
Rebecca Gomez
Defendant:
Indivior Inc., Indivior PLC, Indivior Solutions, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Nations Lending Corporation v. Gomez
as 1:2024cv00222
Plaintiff:
Nations Lending Corporation
Defendant:
Roland Gomez
Gomez v. C. R. Bard, Inc. et al
as 2:2023cv04217
Plaintiff:
Martin B. Gomez
Defendant:
C. R. Bard, Inc., Bard Davol, Inc. and Davol, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Cook v. Peters et al.
as 3:2023cv02211
Plaintiff:
William H. Cook, III
Defendant:
Colette Peters, Warden David Lemaster, S. Gibson and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
Gomez v. City of Canton Police Department et al
as 5:2023cv01788
Plaintiff:
Omar R. Gomez
Defendant:
City of Canton Police Department, Detective Michael Walker, Ohio Adult Parole Authority and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Gomez v. Ryan et al
as 2:2023cv01058
Plaintiff:
John P Gomez and John Paul Gomez
Defendant:
David Ryan, Travis Stevens, Retired Judge Dan W Favreau and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
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.
