Cases 1 - 10 of 16
NOBLE et al v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al
as 3:2021cv15545
In Re:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON TALCUM POWDER PRODUCTS MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION
Plaintiff:
JOANNA NOBLE and SCOTT NOBLE
Defendant:
JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Noble et al v. Federal Insurance Company
as 2:2020cv00703
Plaintiff:
Kelly Noble and Scott Noble
Defendant:
Federal Insurance Company
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441
NOBLE v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 7:2020cv80019
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
JEFFERY SCOTT NOBLE
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Sandra Espinet v. Anthony Scott Noble et al
as 8:2015cv01490
Defendant:
Does and Anthony Scott Noble
Plaintiff:
Sandra Espinet
Charles Fields v. Cheryl Flanagan, et al
as 15-1749
Plaintiff - Appellant:
CHARLES EDWARD FIELDS
Defendant - Appellee:
CHERYL FLANAGAN, Account Teacher, LESLIE HOLTS, RUM, DONALD E. TRAMMELL, ARUS and others
Michael Brown v. Patricia Caruso, et al
as 14-1102
Plaintiff - Appellant:
MICHAEL ALEXANDER BROWN
Defendant - Appellee:
PATRICIA A. CARUSO, RICHARD MCKEON, DENNIS M. STRAUB, Warden and others
Fields v. Flanagan et al
as 2:2013cv14165
Plaintiff:
Charles Fields
Defendant:
Cheryl Flanagan, Donald E Trammell, John Abdoo and others
Brown v. Caruso et al
as 1:2013cv12475
Plaintiff:
Michael Brown
Defendant:
Patricia Caruso, Richard McKeon, Dennis M. Straub and others
David Hudson v. Wright Wade, et al
as 12-2465
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID HUDSON
Defendant - Appellee:
WRIGHT WADE, Inspector, SCOTT NOBLES, Deputy Warden, RAYMOND BOOKER, Warden and others
David Hudson v. Wright Wade, et al
as 11-2313
Plaintiff - Appellant:
DAVID HUDSON
Defendant - Appellee:
WRIGHT WADE, Inspector, SCOTT NOBLES, Deputy Warden, RAYMOND BOOKER, Warden and others
Defendant:
SHERRY CURENTON
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.
