Smith v. Pro Logistics Inc. 1 et al
| Calvin Smith |
| Joe Golic, Pro Logistics Inc. 1 and Derrick Harper |
| 3:2014cv00447 |
| June 6, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi |
| Northern (Jackson) Office |
| Madison |
| F. Keith Ball |
| Daniel P. Jordan |
| Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 |
| 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
16
ORDER denying 15 Motion for Reconsideration of the Order of the Court; denying 15 Motion for Leave to Amend Pleading for Good Cause for the reasons stated in the order. The case is dismissed with prejudice as to the stand-alone constitutional claims. The balance of the Complaint is dismissed without prejudice. A separate judgment will be entered. Signed by District Judge Daniel P. Jordan III on October 27, 2014. (ddi)
|
|
Filing
14
ORDER granting 6 Motion to Dismiss. Smith's Title VII and ADEA claims are dismissed without prejudice but without leave to amend. All remaining claims are dismissed without prejudice, and Smith may file a motion for leave to amend, attaching a proposed amended complaint, on or before October 24, 2014. Failure to move to amend within the time permitted will result in the dismissal without prejudice of the case. Signed by District Judge Daniel P. Jordan III on October 10, 2014. (ddi)
|
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 Mississippi Southern 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.
