Cases 41 - 49 of 49
Martin et al v. Rushing Creek Development Group, LLC et al
as 2:2011cv00010
Plaintiff:
Anthony Martin and Kim Martin
Defendant:
Rushing Creek Development Group, LLC and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 1819
Pipefitters Local No. 636 Defined Benefit Plan v. Tekelec et al
as 5:2011cv00004
Plaintiff:
Pipefitters Local No. 636 Defined Benefit Plan
Defendant:
Tekelec , Franco Plastina , William H. Everett and others
Movant:
Norfolk County Retirement System
Cause Of Action: 12 U.S.C. § 22
DELLINGER UNLIMITED, LLC v. CATERPILLAR, INC., et al
as 1:2010cv00390
Defendant:
CATERPILLAR, INC., RUSH TRUCK CENTERS OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC., RUSH TRUCK CENTERS OF FLORIDA, INC. and others
Plaintiff:
DELLINGER UNLIMITED, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Grant v. Rush et al
as 3:2009cv00311
Plaintiff:
Ricky Carlos Grant
Defendant:
Christopher J. Rush and Daniel J. Bignall
Cause Of Action: Prisoner Civil Rights
Rushing v. CIGNA Corporation d/b/a Cigna Group Insurance et al
as 3:2009cv00303
Plaintiff:
Timothy Rushing
Defendant:
CIGNA Corporation, Fenner Dunlop, Inc. Welfare Benefit Plan and ACS Recovery Services, Inc.
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.
Rush v. Astrue
as 7:2009cv00008
Plaintiff:
Carlene S Rush
Defendant:
Michael J. Astrue
Cause Of Action: U.S. Government Defendant
Allen v. Sims et al
as 3:2009cv00007
Plaintiff:
Comest Thomas Allen
Defendant:
Capt. Sims, Myers, Taylor and others
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
RUSH INDUSTRIES, INC. v. MWP CONTRACTORS, LLC et al
as 1:2008cv00810
Defendant:
MWP CONTRACTORS, LLC and BRANN'S TRANSPORT SERVICES, INC.
Plaintiff:
RUSH INDUSTRIES, INC.
Cause Of Action: Federal Question
Plaintiff v. Defendant
as 5:2007cv00293
Plaintiff:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Defendant:
Plaintiff v. Defendant
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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.
