Cases 1 - 10 of 75
Seikel et al v. Alvarez et al
as 1:2023cv00001
Plaintiff:
Joseph Seikel and Terence Seikel
Petitioner:
United States of America
Defendant:
David B. Alvarez, APPLIED CONSTRUCTION SOLUTIONS, INC., Energy Transportation, LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 31 U.S.C. § 3729 False Claims Act
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE CITY et al v. BRENNTAG NORTH AMERICA, INC. et al
as 2:2019cv21067
Plaintiff:
Fairfax County Water Authority, City of Richmond, County of Chesterfield and others
Defendant:
BRENNTAG NORTH AMERICA INC. and JOHN DOE NOS. 1-50
In Re:
LIQUID ALUMINUM SULFATE ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE CITY et al v. BRENNTAG NORTH AMERICA, INC. et al
as 5:2019cv04846
Plaintiff:
FAIRFAX COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY, CITY OF RICHMOND, COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD and others
Defendant:
JOHN DOE NOS. 1-50 and BRENNTAG NORTH AMERICA, INC.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 15
Sonterra Capital Master Fund L v. Credit Suisse Group AG
as 19-3367
Plaintiff / Appellant:
FrontPoint Healthcare Flagship Enhanced Fund, L.P., Hunter Global Investors SRI Fund, Ltd., Sonterra Capital Master Fund Ltd., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated and others
Defendant / Appellee:
Tullett Prebon (Europe) Limited, ICAP Securities USA LLC., ICAP Europe Limited and others
Defendant:
Bluecrest Capital Management LLP and JPMorgan Chase & Co.
FrontPoint Asian Event Driven v. Citibank, N.A.
as 19-2719
Plaintiff / Appellant:
Fund Liquidation Holdings LLC, as assignee and successor-in-interest to FrontPoint Asian Event Driven Fund L.P., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated,
Defendant:
John Does, Nos. 1-50, Citibank, N.A., Citigroup Inc. and others
Defendant / Appellee:
DBS Bank Ltd., UBS AG, BNP Paribas Securities Corp. and others
Plaintiff:
FrontPoint Asian Event Driven Fund, L.P., Sonterra Capital Master Fund, LTD. and FrontPoint Asian Event Driven Fund, Ltd.
Commissioners of Public Works of the City of Charleston et al v. USALCO, LLC et al
as 3:2019cv12197
Plaintiff:
Commission of Public Works of the City of Greenville SC, Commissioners of Public Works of the City of Charleston, City of Winston-Salem and others
Defendant:
Delta Chemical Corporation, USALCO LLC, John Doe Nos. 1 - 50 and others
In Re:
LIQUID ALUMINUM SULFATE ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Commissioners of Public Works of the City of Charleston et al v. USALCO, LLC et al
as 2:2019cv12197
Plaintiff:
Commission of Public Works of the City of Greenville SC, Commissioners of Public Works of the City of Charleston, City of Winston-Salem and others
Defendant:
Delta Chemical Corporation, USALCO LLC, John Doe Nos. 1 - 50 and others
In Re:
LIQUID ALUMINUM SULFATE ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Commissioners of Public Works of the City of Charleston et al v. USALCO, LLC et al
as 1:2018cv03237
Plaintiff:
Commission of Public Works of the City of Greenville, SC, Commissioners of Public Works of the City of Charleston, City of Winston-Salem and others
Defendant:
Delta Chemical Corporation, John Doe Nos. 1 - 50, Rebecca L. Besson and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Commission of Public Works of the City of Spartanburg et al v. General Chemical Corporation et al
as 2:2018cv09231
Plaintiff:
Commission of Public Works of the City of Spartanburg , City of Winston-Salem and South Carolina Public Service Authority
Defendant:
GENERAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION, GENERAL CHEMICAL PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS LLC, GENERAL CHEMICAL LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
Commission of Public Works of the City of Spartanburg et al v. General Chemical Corporation et al
as SC/2:18-cv-01047
Plaintiff:
Commission of Public Works of the City of Spartanburg , City of Winston-Salem and South Carolina Public Service Authority
Defendant:
General Chemical Corporation , General Chemical Performance Products LLC , General Chemical LLC and others
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.
