Alderman v. Vanity Fair Brands, LP et al
Plaintiff: Tabitha G. Alderman
Defendant: Vanity Fair Brands, LP and Fruit of the Loom
Case Number: 1:2008cv00104
Filed: February 19, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama
Office: Mobile Office
County: Monroe
Presiding Judge:
Presiding Judge: William E. Cassady
Presiding Judge: Kristi K. DuBose
Nature of Suit: Labor: Other
Cause of Action: Family & Medical Leave Act of 1993
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Alderman v. Vanity Fair Brands, LP 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: Tabitha G. Alderman
Represented By: C. Michael Quinn
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: Vanity Fair Brands, LP
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: Fruit of the Loom
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?