Cases 1 - 9 of 9
VELEBER et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2023cv18640
Plaintiff:
DENNIE VELEBER and ESTATE OF DEBBIE LYNN RHODES
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, JOHNSON & JOHNSON HOLDCO (NA), INC., LTL MANAGEMENT LLC and others
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION and JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Katz et al v. Shell Energy North America (US) LP
as 1:2021cv10706
Defendant:
Shell Energy North America (US) LP
Plaintiff:
Samuel Katz and Lynne Rhodes
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227
Katz et al v. Shell Energy North America (US) LP
as 3:2021cv00133
Defendant:
Shell Energy North America (US) LP
Plaintiff:
Samuel Katz and Lynne Rhodes
Cause Of Action: 47 U.S.C. § 0227
Rhodes v. United States of America
as 1:2019cv01046
Respondent:
United States of America
Petitioner:
Roger Lynn Rhodes
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Katz et al v. Mezzi Marketing LLC
as 1:2018mc02122
Petitioner:
Alexander Braurman, Samuel Katz and Lynne Rhodes
Respondent:
Mezzi Marketing LLC
Rhodes v. Mentor Worldwide LLC
as 1:2016cv00042
Plaintiff:
Erica Lynn Rhodes
Defendant:
Mentor Worldwide LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Betancourt v. Rhodes et al
as 1:2009cv00650
Plaintiff:
Aniceto Betancourt
Defendant:
Lynn Rhodes and Division of Motor Vehicles
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rhodes v. Orange County Sheriff's Department
as 6:2007cv01112
Plaintiff:
David Lynn Rhodes
Defendant:
Orange County Sheriff's Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Rhodes v. Orange County Sheriff's Department
as 6:2007cv00731
Plaintiff:
David Lynn Rhodes
Defendant:
Orange County Sheriff's Department
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
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.
