Cases 1 - 10 of 11
Adams v. Godrej SON Holdings, Inc. et al
as 1:2023cv05999
Plaintiff:
Pamela Adams
Defendant:
Godrej SON Holdings, Inc., Loreal USA, Inc., Loreal USA Products, Inc. and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Adams et al v. Max Credit Union
as 3:2023cv00316
Plaintiff:
Pamela Adams and Donovan Sistrunk
Defendant:
Max Credit Union
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1330 Breach of Contract
McClesky et al v. C. R. Bard, Inc.
as 2:2013cv33758
Plaintiff:
Hayley McClesky , Nereida Cintron , Pamela Adams and others
Defendant:
C. R. Bard, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Adams v. PDQ Mobile Mechanics, LLC et al
as 4:2013cv03174
Plaintiff:
Pamela Adams
Defendant:
PDQ Mobile Mechanics, LLC and David Ehrhart
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 2
McClesky et al v. CR Bard Inc
as OKW/5:13-cv-00849
Plaintiff:
Hayley McClesky , Nereida Cintron , Pamela Adams and others
Defendant:
C.R. Bard Inc.
McClesky et al v. CR Bard Inc
as 5:2013cv00849
Plaintiff:
Hayley McClesky , Nereida Cintron , Pamela Adams and others
Defendant:
CR Bard Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Product Liability
Jones v. Adams
as 9:2013cv00146
Plaintiff:
Clifford Jones
Defendant:
Pamela Adams
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Jo Ness Enterprises, Inc. v. Adams et al
as 1:2013cv01240
Plaintiff:
Jo Ness Enterprises, Inc.
Defendant:
Pamela Adams and E.C.A. Realty Corp.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Jones v. Ginsel et al
as 9:2012cv00123
Plaintiff:
Clifford Dwayne Jones
Defendant:
Cody Ginsel, G Hunter, Gary L Currie and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
Lawson et al v. Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals LP et al
as 2:2010cv01885
Plaintiff:
Glenda Lawson , Darlene Guy , Pamela Adams and others
Defendant:
Astrazeneca Pharmaceuticals LP , Astrazeneca LP and Zeneca Inc
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
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.
