Smith v. Womans Hospital et al
Plaintiff: Edward Smith
Defendant: G4S Secure Solutions and Womans Hospital
Case Number: 3:2014cv00500
Filed: August 12, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana
Office: Baton Rouge Office
Presiding Judge: Brian A. Jackson
Presiding Judge: Richard L. Bourgeois
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 31, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 67 RULING AND ORDER GRANTING the Motion/Notice of Defendant Woman'sHospital's Memorandum to Fix Attorney's Fees (Doc. 52).IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall pay to Defendant Woman'sHospital the sum of $44,526.00 as an award for attorneys' fees.Signed by Chief Judge Brian A. Jackson on 1/31/2017. (PJH)
May 6, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 51 AMENDED RULING AND ORDER: Defendant Woman's Hospital's 32 Motion forSummary Judgment is GRANTED. Defendant G4S Secure Solutions' 37 Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. Plaintiff's Title VII discrimination claim,Plaintiff& #039;s Title VII retaliation claim, and Plaintiff's equal protection claim are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 56. Woman's Hospital shall, within 21 days of this Court's original 47 Ruling and Order, file with the Court a memorandum documenting all attorney's fees for which it seeks to be reimbursed. Signed by Chief Judge Brian A. Jackson on 5/6/2016. (BLR)
April 21, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 47 RULING AND ORDER granting Defendant Woman's Hospital's 32 Motion for Summary Judgment and Defendant G4S Secure Solutions' 37 Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff's Title VII discrimination claim,Plain tiff's Tit le VII retaliation claim, and Plaintiffs equal protection claim are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rule 56. Woman's Hospital shall, within 21 days of this Ruling and Order, file with t he Court a memorandum documenting all attorney's fees and costs for which it seeks to be reimbursed. Signed by Chief Judge Brian A. Jackson on 4/20/2016. (LLH)
May 15, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 22 RULING AND ORDER denying 17 Motion to Dismiss for Insufficient Service of Process. The improper service be QUASHED, and that Smith properly serve G4S Secure Solutions within fourteen (14) days from entry of this Order. Failure to effectuate proper service may result in the dismissal of the above-captioned matter. The 13 Motion to Set Aside Default is GRANTED. Signed by Chief Judge Brian A. Jackson on 5/14/2015. (LLH)
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 Louisiana Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Smith v. Womans Hospital et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: G4S Secure Solutions
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: Womans Hospital
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 ]
Plaintiff: Edward Smith
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?