Cases 1 - 10 of 18
Daniel Matus v. Kustom US, Inc.
as 23-16134
Plaintiff / Appellant:
DANIEL MATUS, by and through personal representative estate of Arlene Matus
Defendant / Appellee:
KUSTOM US, INC., an Ohio corporation
Leroy Haeger, et al v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Com, et al
as 13-16862
Plaintiff - Appellee:
LEROY HAEGER, DONNA HAEGER, husband and wife, BARRY HAEGER and others
Defendant:
THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, an Ohio corporation, SPARTAN MOTORS, INC., a Michigan corporation and GULFSTREAM COACH, INC., an Indiana corporation
Movant - Appellant:
FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. and GRAEME HANCOCK
Leroy Haeger, et al v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Com, et al
as 13-16861
Plaintiff - Appellee:
LEROY HAEGER, DONNA HAEGER, husband and wife, BARRY HAEGER and others
Defendant:
THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, an Ohio corporation, SPARTAN MOTORS, INC., a Michigan corporation and GULFSTREAM COACH, INC., an Indiana corporation
Movant - Appellant:
BASIL J. MUSNUFF
Leroy Haeger, et al v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Com
as 13-16801
Plaintiff - Appellee:
LEROY HAEGER, DONNA HAEGER, husband and wife, BARRY HAEGER and others
Defendant - Appellant:
THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, an Ohio corporation
In re: Toyota Motor Corporation
as 13-56493
:
In re: TOYOTA MOTOR CORP. UNINTENDED ACCELERATION MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Appellee:
KARINA BRAZDYS, JOHN MOSCICKI, DALE BALDISSERI and others
Objector - Appellant:
FALLS AUTO GALLERY, LLC, an Ohio limited liability company, DBA Falls Car Collection
Defendant - Appellee:
TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION, a Japanese Corporation / a foreign corporation, 1 Toyota-cho, Toyota, Aichi 471-8571, Japan, DBA Toyota Motor North America, Inc., TOYOTA MOTOR ENGINEERING & MANUFACTURING NORTH AMERICA, INC., a Kentucky corporation, FKA Toyota Motor Manutacturing North America, Inc., FKA Toyota Technical Center, U.S.A., TOYOTA MOTOR NORTH AMERICA, INC., a California corporation / a foreign corporation, 19001 South Western Avenue, Torrance, California 90501 and others
Leroy Haeger, et al v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Com, et al
as 12-17718
Plaintiff - Appellee:
LEROY HAEGER, DONNA HAEGER, husband and wife, BARRY HAEGER and others
Defendant - Appellant:
THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, an Ohio corporation
Defendant:
SPARTAN MOTORS, INC., a Michigan corporation and GULFSTREAM COACH, INC., an Indiana corporation
Movant:
FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C., GRAEME HANCOCK, ROETZEL & ANDRESS, LPA and others
Leroy Haeger, et al v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., et al
as 12-17714
Plaintiff - Appellee:
LEROY HAEGER, DONNA HAEGER, husband and wife, BARRY HAEGER and others
Defendant:
THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, an Ohio corporation, SPARTAN MOTORS, INC., a Michigan corporation and GULFSTREAM COACH, INC., an Indiana corporation
Movant - Appellant:
FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. and GRAEME HANCOCK
Movant:
ROETZEL & ANDRESS, LPA and BASIL J. MUSNUFF
Leroy Haeger, et al v. The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Com, et al
as 12-17716
Plaintiff - Appellee:
LEROY HAEGER, DONNA HAEGER, husband and wife, BARRY HAEGER and others
Defendant:
THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, an Ohio corporation, SPARTAN MOTORS, INC., a Michigan corporation and GULFSTREAM COACH, INC., an Indiana corporation
Movant:
FENNEMORE CRAIG, P.C. and GRAEME HANCOCK
Movant - Appellant:
ROETZEL & ANDRESS, LPA and BASIL J. MUSNUFF
Sandra Gresham v. TA Operating, LLC, et al
as 12-17541
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SANDRA G. GRESHAM
Defendant - Appellee:
TA OPERATING, LLC, DBA Petro Stopping Center #38, as Successor-in-Interest to Petro Stopping Centers, LP, a Delaware limited partnership and TCA PSC GP, LLC, an Ohio limited liability company
Walter Tamosaitis v. URS Inc., et al
as 12-35924
Plaintiff - Appellant:
WALTER L. TAMOSAITIS, Ph.D., an individual
Defendant - Appellee:
URS INC., a Delaware corporation, URS ENERGY AND CONSTRUCTION INC., an Ohio corporation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY and others
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.
