LOWE v. NATIONAL BOARD FOR RESPIRATORY CARE INC et al

Defendant: NATIONAL BOARD FOR RESPIRATORY CARE INC and APPLIED MEASUREMENT PROFESSIONALS INC
Plaintiff: ADAM LOWE
Case Number: 1:2012cv00345
Filed: November 13, 2012
Court: Maine District Court
Office: Bangor Office
County: Penobscot
Presiding Judge: D. BROCK HORNBY
Referring Judge: MARGARET J. KRAVCHUK
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Other
Cause of Action: 42:12101 American Disabilities Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

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 Maine District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: LOWE v. NATIONAL BOARD FOR RESPIRATORY CARE INC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: NATIONAL BOARD FOR RESPIRATORY CARE 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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: APPLIED MEASUREMENT PROFESSIONALS 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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: ADAM LOWE
Represented By: PETER M. RICE
Represented By: KRISTIN L. AIELLO
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 | 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.