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

CARLINO v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION

(What's this?) What is the EasyEdit button? This website gets better when people like you add to it. Just click the EasyEdit button to start. (help)
 
Case Number:2:2009cv00314
Filed:July 17, 2009
 
Court:Maine District Court
Office:Civil Rights: Jobs Office [ Court Info ]
Presiding Judge:JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL
Referring Judge:MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOHN H. RICH III
 
Nature of Suit:Civil Rights - Employment
Cause:Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Search for this case: CARLINO v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION
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 ]
Search for: CARLINO
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 ]
Search for: NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION
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.