Cases 1 - 10 of 15
Jeremy Dunn, et al v. Shane Penfield, et al
as 24-1804
Plaintiff:
Jeremy Dunn and Kevin Love
Defendant:
Shane Penfield, in his official and individual capacities, Penfield Law Firm Professional LLC, Marty Jackley, in his individual capacity and others
Dunn et al v. Penfield et al
as 5:2023cv05025
Plaintiff:
Jeremy Dunn and Kevin Love
Defendant:
Shane Penfield, Penfield Law Firm Professional LLC, Marty Jackley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act - Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights
LOVE v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2021cv23072
Defendant:
3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
KEVIN LOVE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Leon et al v. Gilead Sciences, Inc.
as 4:2020cv03744
Plaintiff:
Shannon Williams, Jeffrey Medley, Tammy Slaughter and others
Defendant:
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Adams v. Trump et al
as 2:2018mc50217
Defendant:
Stephen A. Smith, John Anderson, Daniel Gilbert and others
Plaintiff:
Jerome S. Adams
Adams v. Trump et al
as 2:2018cv10133
Defendant:
Stephen A. Smith, Ryan Friedlinghaus, Mario Lemieux and others
Plaintiff:
Jerome S. Adams
Alvarado et al v. City of Los Angeles et al
as 2:2014cv05632
Plaintiff:
Robert Alvarado, Jeffrey Anderson, Rudy Barrigan and others
Defendant:
City of Los Angeles and Does
Love et al v. Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
as 3:2013cv03329
Plaintiff:
Kevin Love and Crystal Love
Defendant:
Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc.
Pecial_master:
Special Master
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Love et al v. Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc. et al
as TXN/3:13-cv-03329
Plaintiff:
Kevin Love and Crystal Love
Defendant:
Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson Services, Inc.
Pecial_master:
Special Master
USA v. Kevin Love
as 12-30426
Plaintiff - Appellee:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Defendant - Appellant:
KEVIN LOVE, also known as Kelvin Love
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.
