Cases 1 - 7 of 7
Espinosa et al v. 3M Company, The et al
as 2:2023cv00322
Defendant:
3M Company, The, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, Co., AGC Chemicals Americas Inc and others
Plaintiff:
Allen L. Espinosa, Rexalyn Struensee, Rosa L. Vigil and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Espinosa et al v. 3M Company, The et al
as 1:2022cv03256
Plaintiff:
Allen L. Espinosa, Rexalyn Struensee, Rosa L. Vigil and others
Defendant:
The 3M Company, AGC Chemicals Americas Inc., AMEREX Corporation and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
BURKS v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC et al
as 3:2021cv01855
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC
Plaintiff:
NANCY BURKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BURKS v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC. et al
as 3:2019cv14385
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER, INC. and JOHNSON & JOHNSON, INC.
Plaintiff:
NANCY BURKS
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
GROOP INTERNET PLATFORM INC. v. PSYCHOTHERAPY ACTION NETWORK et al
as 1:2019cv01854
Defendant:
PSYCHOTHERAPY ACTION NETWORK, NANCY BURKE, JANICE MUHR and others
Plaintiff:
GROOP INTERNET PLATFORM d/b/a TALKSPACE, GROOP INTERNET PLATFORM INC. and GROOP INTERNET PLATFORM INC. doing business as TALKSPACE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Burk v. Ethicon, Inc. et al
as 2:2013cv04111
Plaintiff:
Nancy Burk
Defendant:
Ethicon, Inc., Ethicon, LLC and Johnson & Johnson
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Burke v. El Cajon City of et al
as 3:2007cv01618
Plaintiff:
Nancy Burke
Defendant:
El Cajon City of, William Robert Taylor and DOES 1-50
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
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.
