Lard v. Alabama Beverage Control Board et al

Plaintiff: Andy Lard
Defendant: Stan Goolsby, Jeff Rogers and Alabama Beverage Control Board
Case Number: 2:2012cv00452
Filed: May 24, 2012
Court: Alabama Middle District Court
Office: Montgomery Office
County: Sumter
Referring Judge: Charles S. Coody
Presiding Judge: W. Harold Albritton
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000
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
September 4, 2012 32 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER that Plaintiff's 31 Motion to Amend the Complaint is GRANTED. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 9/4/2012. (dmn, )
August 10, 2012 23 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: 1. Stan Goolsby having been voluntarily dismissed by the Plaintiff, Stan Goolsby is DISMISSED without prejudice as a Defendant in this case, and his name shall be removed from the caption. The Motion to Dismiss filed by Stan Goolsby 8 is DENIED as moot. 2. The Partial Motion to Dismiss filed by Jeff Rogers 5 is GRANTED to the extent that any claim in Count II asserted against Rogers is DISMISSED with prejudice as toRogers, and Count IV is dismissed without p rejudice as to Rogers. 3. The Partial Motion to Dismiss filed by the Alabama Beverage Control Board ("ABC Board") 11 is GRANTED as to Count IV, and Count IV is dismissed without prejudice as to the ABC Board. 4. The portion of the Parti al Motion to Dismiss 11 which is directed to the hostile environment claim in Count I is held in abeyance. 5. Lard is given until August 22, 2012 to file an Amended Complaint as further set out. 6. Lard is given until August 22, 2012 to file an a dditional response to the ABC Board's arguments regarding the sufficiency of his hostile environment allegations. The remaining portion of the Partial Motion to Dismiss 11 will be taken under submission at that time. Signed by Honorable Judge W. Harold Albritton, III on 8/10/2012. (jg, )

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: Lard v. Alabama Beverage Control Board et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Stan Goolsby
Represented By: Robert Sommerville Hill
Represented By: Robert Lester Martin, 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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Jeff Rogers
Represented By: Robert Sommerville Hill
Represented By: Robert Lester Martin, 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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Alabama Beverage Control Board
Represented By: Robert Lester Martin, III
Represented By: Robert Sommerville Hill
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Andy Lard
Represented By: Ann Carroll Robertson
Represented By: Henry Wallace Blizzard, 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 [ 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?