Bodman v. Aramark Corporation et al
| Chester Bodman |
| Aramark Corporation, Davre Davidson, Bob Marshall, Joseph Neubauer, Eric J. Foss, Chrissy Sharp and Obell Thomas Winn |
| 2:2014cv14420 |
| November 18, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan |
| Detroit Office |
| Chippewa |
| David M. Lawson |
| Mona K. Majzoub |
| Civil Rights |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
36
ORDER Adopting Report and Recommendation for 35 Report and Recommendation, Granting Defendant Aramark's 23 Motion to Dismiss, and Dismissing Complaint. Signed by District Judge David M. Lawson. (SPin)
|
|
Filing
28
Order VACATING 22 Order to Show Cause filed by Chester Bodman., ( Plaintiff to file Response re: 23 due by 6/11/2015), ORDER GRANTING Defendant's 26 MOTION for Leave to File Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) (Doc 23) filed by Aramark Corporation--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)
|
|
Filing
24
ORDER Holding in ABEYANCE Defendant's 23 MOTION to Dismiss Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P 12(b)(6) filed by Aramark Corporation., ( Defendant's Response to Court's Order to Show Cause due by 5/5/2015)--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)
|
|
Filing
21
ORDER to Provide the Correct Address for Defendants., ( Response due by 5/1/2015)--Signed by Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti. (MWil)
|
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 Michigan Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
