Paulsen et al v. Corbel Installations, Inc.

Petitioner: National Labor Relations Board and James G. Paulsen
Respondent: Corbel Installations, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2013cv01673
Filed: March 28, 2013
Court: New York Eastern District Court
Office: Brooklyn Office
0 Judge: Ramon E. Reyes
1 Judge: William F. Kuntz
Nature of Suit: Labor: Other
Cause of Action: 29:151 Labor: Review of Agency Action
Jury Demanded By: None

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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Paulsen et al v. Corbel Installations, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Petitioner: National Labor Relations Board
Represented By: Kimberly Walters
Represented By: Sharon Chau
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 ]
Petitioner: James G. Paulsen
Represented By: Kimberly Walters
Represented By: Sharon Chau
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 ]
Respondent: Corbel Installations, 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 ]

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.