Patrick v. RAI Service Company

Plaintiff: Shawn Christopher Patrick
Defendant: RAI Service Company
Case Number: 3:2016cv00852
Filed: May 24, 2016
Court: Alabama Northern District Court
Office: Northwestern Office
County: Lauderdale
Presiding Judge: Harwell G Davis
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000
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
September 9, 2016 20 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION that it is ORDERED that the Motion to Dismiss is DENIED and this action is STAYED pending resolution through arbitration; the parties are DIRECTED to file a notice with the court upon settlement of the case or the conclusion of arbitration as more fully set out in order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Harwell G Davis, III on 9/9/2016. (AHI)

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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Patrick v. RAI Service Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Shawn Christopher Patrick
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: RAI Service Company
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?