Cases 31 - 38 of 38
Galloway et al v. Johnson & Johnson, Inc. et al
as 3:2017cv00031
Plaintiff:
Constance Galloway and Edward Galloway
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson Inc , Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc and Imerys Talc America Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Dusenbery, Sandra et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al
as 3:2016cv00844
Plaintiff:
Sandra K. Dusenbery and John Dusenbery
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc., Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Wallace, David v. Johnson & Johnson et al
as 3:2016cv00843
Plaintiff:
David Wallace
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc., Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Symbology Innovations LLC v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
as 1:2016cv10752
Plaintiff:
Symbology Innovations LLC
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1126
MOSS et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON INC. et al
as 1:2016cv03107
Defendant:
IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC. and JOHNSON & JOHNSON INC.
Plaintiff:
PENNY MOSS and RICHARD MOSS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Rempas v. Johnson & Johnson et al
as 1:2016cv08622
Plaintiff:
Lucy Rempas
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson , Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc. and Imerys Talc America
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
TEJADA V. JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC. ET AL
as 1:2016cv01353
Defendant:
J & J MOORESVILLE DC, JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC., JONES PACKAGING, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
MARCO TEJADA
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Petition for Removal
Tejada v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc. et al
as 1:2016cv00188
Plaintiff:
Marco Tejada
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc., Jones Packaging, Inc. , J & J Mooresville DC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
