Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Board of County Commissioners of Pawnee County, State of Oklahoma, The v. Purde Pharma L.P. et al
as 4:2018cv00459
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation, Insys Therapeutic, Inc., Christopher Moses and others
Plaintiff:
Board of County Commissioners of Pawnee County, State of Oklahoma, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Board of County Commissioners of Ottawa County, State of Oklahoma, The v. Purde Pharma L.P. et al
as 4:2018cv00466
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation, Insys Therapeutic, Inc., Christopher Moses and others
Plaintiff:
Board of County Commissioners of Ottawa County, State of Oklahoma, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Board of County Commissioners of Osage County, State of Oklahoma, The v. Purde Pharma L.P. et al
as 4:2018cv00461
Defendant:
Purde Pharma L.P., Purdue Pharma Inc., McKesson Corporation and others
Plaintiff:
Board of County Commissioners of Osage County, State of Oklahoma, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Board of County Commissioners of McClain County, State of Oklahoma v. Purde Pharma LP et al
as 5:2018cv00857
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation, Christopher Moses, Mallinckrodt LLC and others
Plaintiff:
The Board of County Commissioners of McClain County, State of Oklahoma
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Board of County Commissioners of Delaware County, State of Oklahoma, The v. Purde Pharma L.P. et al
as 4:2018cv00460
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation, Insys Therapeutic, Inc., Purdue Pharma L.P. and others
Plaintiff:
Board of County Commissioners of Delaware County, State of Oklahoma, The
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1446
The Board of County Commissioners of Garvin County, Oklahoma State of v. Purdue Pharma LP et al
as 5:2018cv00820
Defendant:
McKesson Corporation, Purdue Pharma LP, Christopher Moses and others
Plaintiff:
The Board of County Commissioners of Garvin County, Oklahoma State of
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1442
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.
