Salzer v. SSM Health Care of Oklahoma

Plaintiff - Appellant: RICHARD SALZER, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated
Defendant - Appellee: SSM HEALTH CARE OF OKLAHOMA INC.
Case Number: 13-6099
Filed: April 22, 2013
Court: U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit
Nature of Suit: Employee Retirement

Opinions

We have the following opinions for this case:

Date FiledDescription
August 6, 2014 Summary Salzer v. SSM Health Care of Oklahoma

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
August 6, 2014 1009290866 Opinion or Order of the Court [10196530] Affirmed; Terminated on the merits after oral hearing; Written, signed, published; Judges Lucero, authoring, Murphy and Phillips. Mandate to issue. [13-6099]
Search for this case: Salzer v. SSM Health Care of Oklahoma
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff - appellant: RICHARD SALZER, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated
Represented By: Gregg W. Luther
Represented By: J. Shawn Spencer
Represented By: Bradley C. West
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant - appellee: SSM HEALTH CARE OF OKLAHOMA INC.
Represented By: Elizabeth D. Bowersox
Represented By: Jodi Warmbrod Dishman
Represented By: M. Richard Mullins
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.