Cases 11 - 20 of 22
Goodman v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2014cv28824
Plaintiff:
Mary Goodman
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc. and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 2:2014cv00649
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 12112
States, et al v. Johnson & Johnson, et al
as 13-6288
Plaintiff - Appellee:
KIM DARNALL, DEBBILYNN DAVILA, JAMIE DAVIS and others
Defendant - Appellant:
ETHICON, INC. and JOHNSON & JOHNSON
Johnson & Johnson, et al v. States, et al
as 13-606
Petitioner:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON and ETHICON, INC.
Respondent:
MICHELLE STATES, PATRICIA ORDINO, KIM DARNALL and others
States et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al
as 5:2013cv00841
Plaintiff:
Michelle States , Patricia Ordino , Kim Darnall and others
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability
States et al v. Johnson & Johnson et al
as OKW/5:13-cv-00841
Plaintiff:
Michelle States , Patricia Ordino , Kim Darnall and others
Defendant:
Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon Inc
Robert Goodman et al v. National Railroad Passenger Corporation et al
as 2:2013cv01069
Defendant:
Amtrak Inc, Does and National Railroad Passenger Corporation
Plaintiff:
Mary Goodman and Robert Goodman
Mary Goodman, et al v. Kemuel Kimbrough, et al
as 12-10732
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MARY GOODMAN and MARY GOODMAN
Defendant - Appellee:
KEMUEL KIMBROUGH, ROBYN BOLAND and HERBERT FEEMSTER
Goodman et al v. Clayton County Sheriff Kemuel Kimbrough, Sr. et al
as 1:2010cv03066
Plaintiff:
Bruce Goodman and Mary Goodman
Defendant:
Clayton County Sheriff Kemuel Kimbrough, Sr. , Robyn Boland and Herbert Feemster
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Goodman v. Social Security Administration
as 2:2010cv00071
Plaintiff:
Mary Goodman
Defendant:
Social Security Administration
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405
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.
