Cases 1 - 10 of 60
Cynthia Collier, et al v. GlaxoSmithKline LLC
as 16-4296
Plaintiff - Appellee:
CYNTHIA COLLIER, Personal Representative of the Estate of Anthony Collier, Deceased, on behalf of the Estate of Anthony Collier and on behalf of all wrongful death beneficiaries of Anthony Collier and JEFFIE EZELL, Personal Representative of the Estate of Dora Sykes, Deceased, on behalf of the Estate of Dora Sykes and on behalf of all Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of Dora Sykes
Defendant - Appellee:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC, A Delaware LLC f/k/a Smithkline Beecham Corporation d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline
Movant - Appellant:
MICHAEL D. GREER, Esquire and GREER RUSSELL DENT & LEATHERS PLLC
Movant - Appellee:
GUARANTY TRUST CO, ATG Trust Co
In Re: Avandia Marketing
as 16-2887
Plaintiff - Appellee:
CYNTHIA COLLIER, Personal Representative of the Estate of Anthony Collier, Deceased, on behalf of the Estate of Anthony Collier and on behalf of all wrongful death beneficiaries of Anthony Collier and JEFFIE EZELL, Personal Representative of the Estate of Dora Sykes, Deceased, on behalf of the Estate of Dora Sykes and on behalf of all Wrongful Death Beneficiaries of Dora Sykes
Defendant - Appellee:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC, A Delaware LLC f/k/a Smithkline Beecham Corporation d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline
Movant - Appellant:
MICHAEL D. GREER, Esquire and GREER RUSSELL DENT & LEATHERS PLLC
Movant - Appellee:
GUARANTY TRUST CO, ATG Trust Co
ROCHESTER DRUG CO-OPERATIVE, INC. v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION d/b/a GLAXOSMITHKLINE et al
as 2:2015cv08034
Plaintiff:
ROCHESTER DRUG CO-OPERATIVE, INC.
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION d/b/a GLAXOSMITHKLINE, TEVA PHARAMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LTD. and TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 1
In Re: Wellbutrin XL ANTITRUST, et al
as 12-8039
Not Party - Amicus Curiae:
In re: WELLBUTRIN XL ANTITRUST LITIGATION
Plaintiff - Respondent:
INDIRECT PURCHASER CLASS and PLUMBERS AND PIPEFITTERS LOCAL 572, Health and Welfare Fund
Defendant - Petitioner:
VALEANT PHARMACEUTICALS INTERNATIONAL, f/k/a Biovail Corporation, VALEANT INTERNATIONAL BARBADOS, f/k/a Biovail Laboratories International SRL and successor to Biovail Laboratories, Inc. and GLAXOSMITH KLINE, f/k/a SmithKline Beecham Corporation d/b/a GlaxoSmithKline and GlaxoSmithKline Plc
Not Party - Respondent:
IBEW-NECA LOCAL 505
Movant - Respondent:
AETNA HEALTH OF CALIFORNIA, INC
ROGERS et al v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION et al
as 2:2012cv01051
Plaintiff:
ROY ROGERS and LINDA ROGERS
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION, GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC and SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION D/B/A GLAXOSMITHKLINE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
MCDONALD v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION et al
as 2:2012cv00367
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL MCDONALD
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION, GLAXOSMITHKLINE and SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION D/B/A GLAXOSMITHKLINE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BROWN v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION et al
as 2:2011cv07372
Plaintiff:
JOANN BROWN
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION, GLAXOSMITHKLINE, LLC and SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION D/B/A GLAXOSMITHKLINE (GSK)
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BROWN v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION et al
as 2:2011cv07348
Plaintiff:
MARJORIE BROWN
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION, GLAXOSMITHKLINE, LLC and SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION D/B/A GLAXOSMITHKLINE, LLC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BURLEY et al v. GLAXOSMITHKLINE, LLC et al
as 2:2010cv04097
Plaintiff:
LINWOOD BURLEY and CHARLOTTE BURLEY
Defendant:
GLAXOSMITHKLINE, LLC , SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION and SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION D/B/A GLAXOSMITHKLINE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
BURCIAGA v. SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION D/B/A GLAXOSMITHKLINE
as 2:2009cv05397
Plaintiff:
CONSUELO BURCIAGA
Defendant:
SMITHKLINE BEECHAM CORPORATION D/B/A GLAXOSMITHKLINE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Personal Injury
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.
