Roth v. Maricopa County
| Aaron J. Roth |
| Maricopa County |
| 2:2009cv00355 |
| February 23, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Civil Rights: Jobs Office |
| Maricopa |
| Frederick J Martone |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
50
ORDER denying 47 Plaintiff's Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 10/6/10.(TLJ)
|
|
Filing
38
ORDER granting 32 defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Frederick J Martone on 8/4/10.(TLJ)
|
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 Arizona District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Roth v. Maricopa County | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Aaron J. Roth | |
| Represented By: | Francis G Fanning |
| 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: Maricopa County | |
| 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.
