Cases 1 - 10 of 110
BAKER v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2023cv01431
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM BAKER
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
James v. City of Rochester et al
as 1:2023cv00054
Plaintiff:
Shenea James
Defendant:
City of Rochester, RPD Officer William Baker, RPD Investigator Richard Arrowood and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2674 Federal Tort Claims Act
James v. City of Rochester et al
as 6:2023cv06057
Plaintiff:
Shenea James
Defendant:
City of Rochester, RPD Officer William Baker, RPD Investigator Richard Arrowood and others
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 2674 Federal Tort Claims Act
Anthony et al v. Van Over et al
as 3:2022cv00416
Plaintiff:
William Anthony, PBA Martial Arts, Inc., Katie Baker and others
Defendant:
Barry Van Over, Myles Baker, Brent Seebohm and others
Cause Of Action: 18 U.S.C. § 1962 Racketeering (RICO) Act
Baker v. Commissioner of Social Security et al
as 3:2022cv02652
Plaintiff:
William Baker
Defendant:
Commissioner of Social Security and ssa
Interested Party:
SSAOGC
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 405 Review of HHS Decision (SSID)
BAKER v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv19115
Plaintiff:
WILLIAM BAKER
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
William Baker v. Twitter, Inc. et al
as 2:2022cv06525
Plaintiff:
William Baker
Defendant:
Twitter, Inc., Jack Dorsey, Ned Segal and others
Williams v. Baker
as 3:2022cv00713
Plaintiff:
Kennard C. Williams, Jr.
Defendant:
William Baker
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights Act
BAKER v. 3M COMPANY
as 3:2022cv14653
Plaintiff:
COREY WILLIAM BAKER and COREY WILLIAM BAKER, SR
Defendant:
3M COMPANY
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Product Liability
Baker v. Smith et al
as 6:2022cv02073
Plaintiff:
William Baker
Defendant:
Doctor Smith and Warden Wallace
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights, State Filers
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.
