Chebbi v. Gladstone Auto, LLC
Plaintiff: Elyes Chebbi
Defendant: Gladstone Auto, LLC
Case Number: 3:2010cv01560
Filed: December 23, 2010
Court: US District Court for the District of Oregon
Office: Portland Office
Presiding Judge: Ann L. Aiken
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 Civil Rights
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
July 2, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 42 OPINION & ORDER: Defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied for Plaintiff's state and § 1981 hostile work environment claims and granted for Plaintiff's disparate treatment and retaliation claims under both the state and § 1981 statutes. See 18-page opinion & order attached. Signed on 7/2/2012 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (mr)
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 Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Chebbi v. Gladstone Auto, LLC
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Gladstone Auto, LLC
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 ]
Plaintiff: Elyes Chebbi
Represented By: Aaron W. Baker
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.


Why Is My Information Online?