Cases 1 - 4 of 4
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company v. Klassic Engineering and Construction, Inc. et al
as 8:2022cv00090
Plaintiff:
Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company
Defendant:
Klassic Engineering and Construction, Inc., Keivan V. Shirali and Elyas Raeisi Nafchi
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract
Construction Laborers Trust Funds for Southern California Administrative Company v. Klassic Engineering and Construction, Inc. et al
as 2:2018cv08665
Plaintiff:
CONSTRUCTION LABORERS TRUST FUNDS FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE COMPANY, a Delaware limited liability company and Construction Laborers Trust Funds for Southern California Administrative Company
Defendant:
DOE 1 TO DOE 5, Keivan Shirali, an individual, SHENK REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT, INC., a California corporation doing business as SHENK DEVELOPERS and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Board of Trustees of the Cement Masons Southern California Health and Welfare Fund et al v. Klassic Engineering and Construction, Inc.
as 2:2017cv02072
Plaintiff:
Board of Trustees of the Cement Masons Joint Apprenticeship Trust, Board of Trustees of the Cement Masons Southern California Health and Welfare Fund, Board of Trustees of the Cement Masons Southern California Individual Retirement Account Defined Contribution Trust and others
Defendant:
Klassic Engineering and Construction, Inc.
Board of Trustees of the Cement Masons Southern California Health and Welfare Fund et al v. Klassic Engineering and Construction, Inc.
as 2:2016cv00174
Plaintiff:
Board of Trustees of the Cement Masons Joint Apprenticeship Trust, Board of Trustees of the Cement Masons Southern California Health and Welfare Fund, Board of Trustees of the Cement Masons Southern California Individual Retirement Account Defined Contribution Trust and others
Defendant:
Klassic Engineering and Construction, Inc.
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.
