1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. STROSIN v. J.M. SMUCKER COMPANY
 

STROSIN v. J.M. SMUCKER COMPANY

No. 5:14-cv-07085.

TADEUSZ STROSIN et al., Plaintiffs, v. THE J.M. SMUCKER COMPANY et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania.

October 20, 2015.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

TADEUSZ STROSIN, Plaintiff, represented by KATHLEEN KIRKPATRICK , THE TUCKER LAW GROUP & JOE H. TUCKER, JR. , THE TUCKER LAW GROUP.

KRYSTYNA STROSIN, Plaintiff, represented by KATHLEEN KIRKPATRICK , THE TUCKER LAW GROUP & JOE H. TUCKER, JR. , THE TUCKER LAW GROUP.

THE J.M. SMUCKER COMPANY, Defendant, represented by HUGH P. O'NEILL , THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP & JOSHUA J. BOVENDER , THOMAS THOMAS & HAFER.

THE FOLGERS COFFEE COMPANY, Defendant, represented by HUGH P. O'NEILL , THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP & JOSHUA J. BOVENDER , THOMAS THOMAS & HAFER.

EXEL LOGISTICS, Defendant, represented by HUGH P. O'NEILL , THOMAS, THOMAS & HAFER, LLP & JOSHUA J. BOVENDER , THOMAS THOMAS & HAFER.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Defendants' Rule 35 Motion for Physical Examination of the Plaintiff — Denied

I. Introduction

Presently before the Court is Defendants The J.M. Smucker Company, The Folgers Coffee Company, and Exel Logistics's Rule 35...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases