Cases 1 - 4 of 4
Plumbers & Pipefitters Welfare Fund et al v. BMG Mechanical Corp. et al
as 2:2019cv00164
Defendant:
BMG Mechanical Corp. and Brittany Gayheart
Plaintiff:
Plumbers & Pipefitters Local No. 172 Equality and Stabilization Fund, Plumbers & Pipefitters Local No. 172 Pension Fund, Plumbers & Pipefitters Local No. 172 Voluntary 401(k) Fund and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1131
Local No. 172 Plumbers & Pipef, et al v. Matrix Plumbing and Heating, I, et al
as 12-3472
Plaintiff - Appellee:
LOCAL NO. 172 PLUMBERS & PIPEFITTERS WELFARE FUND BOARD OF TRUSTEES, LOCAL NO. 172 PLUMBERS & PIPEFITTERS PENSION FUND BOARD OF TRUSTEES, LOCAL NO. 172 PLUMBERS & PIPEFITTERS APPRENTICESHIP AND JOURNEYMAN TRAINING FUND BOARD OF TRUSTEES and others
Defendant - Appellant:
MATRIX PLUMBING AND HEATING, INCORPORATED, an Indiana corporation and JOSEPH LASKOWSKI, an individual
Plumbers & Pipefitters Welfare Fund Board of Trustees et al v. Vic Trippel Plumbing & Heating Inc et al
as 2:2012cv00201
Plaintiff:
Local 172 Plumbers & Pipefitters Welfare Fund Board of Trustees , Local No 172 Plumbers & Pipefitters Pension Fund Board of Trustees of the , Local No 172 Plumbers & Pipefitters Apprenticeship and Journeyman Training Fund Board of Trustees of the and others
Defendant:
Vic Trippel Plumbing & Heating Inc and Vic Trippel LLC
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132
Plumbers & Pipefitters Welfare Fund Board of Trustees of the et al v. Matrix Plumbing and Heating Inc et al
as 2:2009cv00414
Plaintiff:
Local No 172 Plumbers & Pipefitters Welfare Fund Board of Trustees of the, Local No 172 Plumbers & Pipefitters Welfare Fund Board of Trustees of the, Local No 172 Plumbers & Pipefitters Welfare Fund Board of Trustees of the and others
Defendant:
Matrix Plumbing and Heating Inc, MKH Mechanical Inc, Joseph Laskowski and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
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.
