Search Federal District Court filings
Party Name (optional):
Cases Filed In:
Lawsuit Type:
Show:
Cases Filed:
and

Kattenbraker v. Union Pacific Railroad Company

Plaintiff:Michael D. Kattenbraker
Defendant:Union Pacific Railroad Company
 
Case Number:3:2009cv00927
Filed:November 4, 2009
 
Court:Illinois Southern District Court
Office:East St. Louis Office [ Court Info ]
County:Randolph
Presiding Judge:Judge Michael J. Reagan
Referring Judge:Magistrate Judge Philip M. Frazier
 
Nature of Suit:Torts - Injury - Federal Employers Liability
Cause:45:51 Railways: Fed. Employer's Liability Act
Jurisdiction:Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:Plaintiff
Amount Demanded:$75,000.00
Search for this case: Kattenbraker v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
Search Blogs[ Justia BlawgSearch | BlawgSearch Google Co-op | Blawg.com | Bloglines | Feedster | Google Blogsearch | Technorati ]
Search News[ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web[ Legal Web | Google | MSN | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Michael D. Kattenbraker
Search Dockets[ Dockets ]
Search Blogs[ Justia BlawgSearch | BlawgSearch Google Co-op | Blawg.com | Bloglines | Feedster | Google Blogsearch | Technorati ]
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 | MSN | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Union Pacific Railroad Company
Search Dockets[ Dockets ]
Search Blogs[ Justia BlawgSearch | BlawgSearch Google Co-op | Blawg.com | Bloglines | Feedster | Google Blogsearch | Technorati ]
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 | MSN | Yahoo | Ask ]


The Justia Federal District Court Filings & Dockets site republishes public litigation records retrieved from the US Federal District Courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, and do not necessarily reflect the view of Justia.