Tootill v. Secyritas Security Svc USA Inc
Barrie Tootill |
Secyritas Security Svc USA Inc |
3:2008cv01096 |
July 24, 2008 |
US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
Civil Rights: Jobs Office |
Hartford |
Christopher F. Droney |
Plaintiff |
Federal Question |
29:621 Job Discrimination (Age) |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 28 RULING granting 22 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Christopher F. Droney on 8/16/2010. (Gothers, M.)(12 pages) |
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Search for this case: Tootill v. Secyritas Security Svc USA Inc | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Barrie Tootill | |
Represented By: | John R. Williams |
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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Secyritas Security Svc USA Inc | |
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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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 should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.