Thomas v. Lake County
Teresa Thomas |
Lake County |
1:2013cv00852 |
May 21, 2013 |
US District Court for the District of Oregon |
Medford (1) Office |
Mark D. Clarke |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
Both |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 55 ORDER: Adopting Findings and Recommendation 53 ; Granting Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 26 . Signed on 1/12/2015 by Judge Owen M. Panner. (jkm) |
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 Oregon 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
Search for this case: Thomas v. Lake County | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Teresa Thomas | |
Represented By: | Daniel J. Snyder |
Represented By: | Carl Lee Post |
Represented By: | Cynthia J. Gaddis |
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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Defendant: Lake County | |
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 | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | 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.