CHAHIL v. EPISCOPAL CHURCH HOME FRIENDSHIP, INC.
Plaintiff: PARSHOTAM CHAHIL
Defendant: EPISCOPAL CHURCH HOME FRIENDSHIP, INC.
Case Number: 1:2010cv00418
Filed: March 15, 2010
Court: US District Court for the District of Columbia
Office: Washington, DC Office
Presiding Judge: Richard W. Roberts
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Accomodations
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 7, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 22 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION re 17 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Robert L. Wilkins on 9/7/2012. (tcb)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 District Of Columbia District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: CHAHIL v. EPISCOPAL CHURCH HOME FRIENDSHIP, INC.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: PARSHOTAM CHAHIL
Represented By: Richard J. Link
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: EPISCOPAL CHURCH HOME FRIENDSHIP, 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.


Why Is My Information Online?