Cases 1 - 8 of 8
SEXTON v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY et al
as 3:2022cv06901
Plaintiff:
CARMEN A. SEXTON
Defendant:
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Sean Abrams and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Notice of Removal - Employment Discrim
v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2022cv06801
Defendant:
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Major Sean Abrams, DAVIN BORG and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Fed. Question: Employment Discrimination
SEXTON v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS et al
as 3:2021cv20404
Defendant:
JEFFREY PERLMAN, NEW JERSEY DEPARMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL, NJ DIVISION OF RISK MANAGEMENT ET AL and others
Plaintiff:
CARMEN A. SEXTON
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1345 Property Damage
ROGERS v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2017cv07004
Plaintiff:
MARY ANN ROGERS
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON , Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. , IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC. ("IMERYS TALC") and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
ROGERS v. NATIONAL GYPSUM CO. et al
as 2:2009cv92405
Plaintiff:
MARY T. ROGERS and MARY T. ROGERS
Defendant:
NATIONAL GYPSUM CO., ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, INC., GAF CORP. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
ROGERS v. GAF CORPORATION et al
as 2:2008cv84443
Plaintiff:
MARY A. ROGERS, MARY A. ROGERS and MARY A. ROGERS
Defendant:
GAF CORPORATION, HOPEMAN BROTHERS, INC., ACANDS, INC. and others
Cause Of Action: Diversity
Rogers v. USA et al
as 2:2007cv67868
Plaintiff:
Mary Grace Rogers
Defendant:
USA, Johns Manville International, Inc., Construction Company Babcock & Wilcox and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
ROGERS et al v. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION et al
as 2:2007cv60680
Plaintiff:
CARL L ROGERS and MARY L ROGERS
Defendant:
OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, PITTSBURG CORNING CORPORATION, Acands Inc and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Asbestos Litigation
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.
