Williams v. City of Austin
Plaintiff: Blayne Williams
Defendant: City of Austin
Case Number: 1:2014cv00695
Filed: July 29, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Texas
Office: Austin Office
Presiding Judge: Sam Sparks
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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
March 16, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 71 ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 42 Sealed Motion; DISMISSING AS MOOT 62 Objections and Motion to Strike Evidence Attached to Plaintiff's Response. Signed by Judge Sam Sparks. (ml)
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 Texas Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Williams v. City of Austin
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: City of Austin
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: Blayne Williams
Represented By: Gary L. Bledsoe
Represented By: Potter Bledsoe, LLP
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?