Nettles v. Utilities Board, City of Daphne, Ala
Plaintiff: Voneka Nettles
Defendant: Utilities Board, City of Daphne, Ala
Case Number: 1:2016cv00575
Filed: November 18, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Alabama
Office: Mobile Office
County: Mobile
Presiding Judge: Kristi K. DuBose
Presiding Judge: William E. Cassady
Nature of Suit: Americans with Disabilities - Employment
Cause of Action: 42:1983
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
February 3, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER granting 4 Motion to Strike Jury Demand such that the jury demand is stricken from Plaintiff's Complaint and this matter will be set for a non-jury trial. Signed by Judge Kristi K. DuBose on 2/3/2017. (cmj)
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: Nettles v. Utilities Board, City of Daphne, Ala
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Voneka Nettles
Represented By: Ronnie L. Williams
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: Utilities Board, City of Daphne, Ala
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?