Flosi et al v. Peakstone Financial Services, Inc.
| Martin Flosi, Tamara Flosi and Roger Seth Carstens |
| Peakstone Financial Services, Inc. |
| 2:2009cv00774 |
| April 16, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Civil Rights: Jobs Office |
| Maricopa |
| Mary H Murguia |
| None |
| Diversity |
| 28:1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination |
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
54
AMENDED ORDER, granting Peakstone's Motion to Dismiss 15 ; dismissing this case without prejudice; denying the Flosis' Motion to Consolidate as moot 32 ; granting Peakstone's request for attorneys' fees and costs in an amount to be determined upon Peakstone's submission of supporting documentation; denying Peakstone's Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions 45 ; directing the Clerk to enter judgment accordingly. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 6/15/10. (REW)
|
|
Filing
50
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED granting Peakstone's 15 Motion to Dismiss. FURTHER ORDERED dismissing this case with prejudice. FURTHER ORDERED denying the Flosis' 32 Motion to Consolidate as moot. FURTHER ORDERED granting Peakstones request for attys' fees and costs in an amount to be determined upon Peakstone's submission of supporting documentation. FURTHER ORDERED denying Peakstone's 45 Motion for Rule 11 Sanctions. FURTHER ORDERED directing the Clerk of the Court to enter jgm accordingly. Signed by Judge Mary H Murguia on 12/15/09. (SAT)
|
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
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.
