Toodle v. Allen
Plaintiff: Clarke Toodle
Defendant: Richard F. Allen
Case Number: 2:2009cv00150
Filed: February 25, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Middle District of Alabama
Office: Civil Rights: Jobs Office
County: Montgomery
Presiding Judge: William Keith Watkins
Presiding Judge: Charles S. Coody
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 42:1983 Civil Rights Act

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
June 28, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 39 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting the 31 Motion for summary judgment and dismissing this case with prejudice. Signed by Honorable William Keith Watkins on 6/28/2010. (br, )
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 Alabama Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Toodle v. Allen
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Clarke Toodle
Represented By: William Franklin Patty
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: Richard F. Allen
Represented By: Kim Tobias Thomas
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?