1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. HANEY v. BRENNTAG NORTH AMERICA, INC.
 

HANEY v. BRENNTAG NORTH AMERICA, INC.

No. CV 19-42-BLG-SPW-TJC.

HEATHER M. HANEY, as Personal Representative of the Estate of DEAN HASLER, Deceased, Plaintiff, v. BRENNTAG NORTH AMERICA, INC., et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Montana, Billings Division.

June 6, 2019.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 28 U.S.C. § 1332
Cause: 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity - Personal Injury
Nature of Suit: 368 P.I. : Asbestos
Source: PACER

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Heather M. Haney, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Dean Hasler, Deceased, Plaintiff, represented by Jon M. Moyers , MOYERS LAW P.C.

Brenntag North America, Inc., sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Mineral Pigment Solutions, Inc. and as successor-in-interest to Whittaker Clark & Daniels, Inc., Brenntag Specialties, Inc., sued individually and as successor-in-interest to Whittaker Clark & Daniels, Inc. & Whittaker Clark & Daniels, Inc., Defendants, represented by Scott G. Gratton , BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C.

Honeywell International, Inc., sued as successor-in-interest to Bendix Corporation, Defendant, represented by Gary M. Zadick , UGRIN ALEXANDER ZADICK & HIGGINS.

Johnson & Johnson & Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc., a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, Defendants, represented by Maxon R. Davis , DAVIS HATLEY HAFFEMAN & TIGHE.

The Procter and Gamble Company, sued as successor-in-interest to The Shulton Group and/or Shulton Inc., Shulton Inc, sued individually and as successor to The Shulton Group and/or Shulton, Inc. & Wyeth Holdings LLC, sued individually and as successor-in-interest to The Shulton Group and/or Shulton Inc., Defendants, represented by Mark T. Wilson , JARDINE STEPHENSON BLEWETT & WEAVER.

Cyprus Mines Corporation, Defendant, represented by Daniel J. Auerbach , BROWNING KALECZYC BERRY & HOVEN, P.C..

ORDER

Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. have filed a motion change venue. (Doc. 8.) Defendants argue the proper venue for this action under Local Rule 3.2(b) is the Great Falls Division. Plaintiff does not oppose the motion. (Doc. 33.) Upon review of the Amended...

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