MAPP v. COURT
Plaintiff: MONICA MAPP
Defendant: D.C. SUPERIOR COURT
Case Number: 1:2013cv00329
Filed: March 13, 2013
Court: US District Court for the District of Columbia
Office: Washington, DC Office
County: 11001
Presiding Judge: John D. Bates
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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
April 28, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 26 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION. Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on April 28, 2014. (lcrcl4 )
November 25, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 17 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION as to the defendant's Motion to Dismiss 9 . Signed by Judge Royce C. Lamberth on November 25, 2013. (lcrcl4)
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: MAPP v. COURT
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: MONICA MAPP
Represented By: Nathaniel D. Johnson
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: D.C. SUPERIOR COURT
Represented By: Patricia B. Donkor
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?