Cases 1 - 6 of 6
Shirley Morefield v. Irving Bailey
as 13-2071
Plaintiff - Appellant:
SHIRLEY MOREFIELD, Derivatively and on behalf of nominal defendant, Computer Sciences Corporation
Defendant - Appellee:
IRVING W. BAILEY, DAVID J. BARRAM, STEPHEN L. BAUM and others
Morefield v. Bailey et al
as 1:2012cv01468
Plaintiff:
Shirley Morefield
Defendant:
Irving W. Bailey, David J. Barram, Stephen L. Baum and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Fiduciary Duty
Hung v. Laphen et al
as 1:2011cv01144
Plaintiff:
Che Wu Hung
Defendant:
Michael W. Laphen , Michael J. Mancuso , David J. Barram and others
Cause Of Action: 15 U.S.C. § 78
Frederico Quan, et al v. Computer Sciences Corporation, et al
as 09-56248
Plaintiff - Appellee:
FREDERICO QUAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, WALTER GRAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, DON TYRONE BALLARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and others
Defendant - Appellant:
COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION, CSC RETIREMENT AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS PLANS COMMITTEE, LEON J. LEVEL and others
Defendant:
VAN B. HONEYCUTT and HOWARD D. FISK
Frederico Quan, et al v. Computer Sciences Corporation, et al
as 09-56190
Plaintiff - Appellant:
FREDERICO QUAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, WALTER GRAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, DON TYRONE BALLARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and others
Defendant - Appellee:
COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION, CSC RETIREMENT AND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS PLANS COMMITTEE, LEON J. LEVEL and others
Federico Quan et al v. Computer Sciences Corporation et al
as 2:2008cv02398
Defendant:
Irving W Bailey, II, Stephen L Baum, CSC Retirement and Employee Benefits Plans Committee and others
Plaintiff:
Don Tyrone Ballard, Walter Gray, Frederico Quan and others
Cause Of Action: 29 U.S.C. § 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits
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.
