Harris v. Olive Garden, GMRI, Inc. et al

Defendant: Olive Garden, GMRI, Inc. and Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel, LLC
Plaintiff: Norma Jean Harris
Case Number: 1:2013cv00447
Filed: April 24, 2013
Court: Michigan Western District Court
Office: Southern Division (1) Office
County: Kalamazoo
Presiding Judge: Gordon J. Quist
Nature of Suit: P.I.: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1446 Petition for Removal- Personal Injury
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

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 Michigan Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Harris v. Olive Garden, GMRI, 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: Olive Garden, GMRI, Inc.
Represented By: Mark E. Shreve
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: Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel, LLC
Represented By: Mark E. Shreve
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: Norma Jean Harris
Represented By: William L. Benefiel
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 were retrieved from PACER, and should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.