Casagrande v. OhioHealth

Plaintiff: Joseph Casagrande
Defendant: OhioHealth
Case Number: 2:2013cv00238
Filed: March 14, 2013
Court: Ohio Southern District Court
Office: Columbus Office
County: FRANKLIN
Referring Judge: Terence P Kemp
Presiding Judge: Edmund A Sargus
Nature of Suit: Labor: Family and Medical Leave Act
Cause of Action: 29:2617 Family and Medical Leave Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed#Document Text
February 18, 2015 44 Opinion or Order of the Court OPINION AND ORDER denying 34 Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment and granting 35 Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Chief Judge Edmund A Sargus on 02/18/2015. (dh1)
February 18, 2015 45 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT is entered pursuant to the Opinion and Order filed 02/18/2015. This case is CLOSED. (dh1)

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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Casagrande v. OhioHealth
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Joseph Casagrande
Represented By: Gregory R Mansell
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: OhioHealth
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.