Cases 1 - 10 of 63
PARKER v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 9:2023cv31014
Plaintiff:
WAYNE PARKER
Defendant:
3M COMPANY, 3M OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY LLC, AEARO HOLDING LLC and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
PARKER v. DAVIS et al
as 1:2022cv07140
Petitioner:
WAYNE PARKER
Respondent:
BRUCE DAVIS and THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
Roger Parker v. County of Riverside, et al
as 22-55614
Plaintiff / Appellee:
ROGER WAYNE PARKER
Defendant / Appellant:
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, PAUL E. ZELLERBACK, SEAN LAFFERTY and others
Roger Parker v. County of Riverside, et al
as 22-80041
Respondent:
ROGER WAYNE PARKER
Petitioner:
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, PAUL E. ZELLERBACK, SEAN LAFFERTY and others
Parker v. 3M Company, The et al
as 2:2021cv03170
Defendant:
3M Company, The, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, BASF Corp and others
Plaintiff:
Wayne Parker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Roger Wayne Parker v. County of Riverside et al
as 5:2021cv01280
Plaintiff:
Roger Wayne Parker
Defendant:
County of Riverside, Paul E. Zellerback, Sean Lafferty and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Hernandez et al v. Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART)
as 4:2021cv01782
Plaintiff:
Michael Caldwell, Phyllis Accornero, Paul Naepflin and others
Defendant:
Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit District (SMART)
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
Parker v. Medtronic Sofamor Danak, U.S.A., Inc.
as 1:2020cv02456
Defendant:
Medtronic Sofamor Danak, U.S.A., Inc. doing business as Medtronic
Plaintiff:
Wayne Parker
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1391
PARKER JR v. 3M COMPANY et al
as 8:2020cv96855
Defendant:
AEARO HOLDING LLC, AEARO INTERMEDIATE LLC, AEARO TECHNOLOGIES LLC and others
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL WAYNE PARKER JR
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
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.
