Boyd et al v. Sysco Corporation et al
Plaintiff: Wayne Boyd and Whitfield R Boyd
Defendant: Sysco Corporation, Sysco Corporation Group Benefit Plan and United Behavioral Health
Case Number: 4:2013cv00599
Filed: March 6, 2013
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Florence Office
County: Florence
Presiding Judge: R Bryan Harwell
Nature of Suit: Labor: E.R.I.S.A.
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
December 1, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 56 OPINION AND ORDER. Signed by the Honorable R. Bryan Harwell on 12/1/2015. (hcic, )
September 3, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 55 ORDER granting defendants' 50 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying plaintiffs' 45 Motion for Summary Judgment. This order pertains to the second claim in the complaint. The Court will issue an order at a later time ruling on the parties' cross motions for judgment. Signed by the Honorable R. Bryan Harwell on 9/3/2015. (hcic, )
November 10, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 36 ORDER granting in part 27 Motion to Compel; denying 28 Motion to Deem Requests Admitted; denying as moot 32 Motion for Protective Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Kaymani D West on 11/10/2014. (hcic, )
August 18, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 23 CONSENT PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by the Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 8/18/2014. (hcic, )</b
July 3, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 19 ORDER on 15 Motion for Discovery. The Court finds that limited discovery should be allowed as set forth herein. All discovery is to be completed by 9/1/2014. Should defense counsel believe that a protective order is necessary regarding this discovery, they should submit a consent protective order to the Court. Signed by the Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 7/3/2014. (hcic, )
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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Boyd et al v. Sysco Corporation et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Wayne Boyd
Represented By: Blaney A Coskrey, III
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: Whitfield R Boyd
Represented By: Blaney A Coskrey, III
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: Sysco Corporation
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: Sysco Corporation Group Benefit Plan
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: United Behavioral Health
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?