Talk:In re Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

Started the initial page. Further reading will insert links this weekend as well as additional content.Quietcat (talk) 18:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added two new sections and one link to establish notability.Quietcat (talk) 18:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Currently covers the wrong case?

It seems like this page covers a few different cases, including Garlock's bankruptcy proceedings, suit against the law firms, as well as the case against Garlock itself, but the primary case does not seem to be Gray v. Garlock Sealing Technologies. I tried to create an actual lead for this article and clean up some of the bare URLs, but I may have added some erroneous information here. I think the bankruptcy proceeding was In re: Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, which is the case that was handled in the North Carolina district court by Hodges. From some docket website I found, Gray v. Garlock Sealing Technologies looks like some separate but related case, one that is not actually notable. I'm going to boldly move this page to In re Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, which is the only case I'm seeing cited by any of these reliable sources. 0x0077BE [^talk/_contrib] 16:46, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]