Stark v. Copan Truck Stop, Inc., et al

Defendant: Copan Truck Stop, Inc. and Donna Chaney
Plaintiff: Jimmy D Stark
Case Number: 4:2012cv00688
Filed: December 21, 2012
Court: Oklahoma Northern District Court
Office: Tulsa Office
County: Washington
Referring Judge: Paul J Cleary
Presiding Judge: Terence Kern
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Jury Demanded By: Both

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 Oklahoma Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Stark v. Copan Truck Stop, 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: Copan Truck Stop, Inc.
Represented By: Michael Anthony Shiflet
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: Donna Chaney
Represented By: Michael Anthony Shiflet
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: Jimmy D Stark
Represented By: Timothy Scott Kittle
Represented By: David Royce Keesling
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.