Rutt v. Pritzker

Plaintiff: Beverly T Rutt
Defendant: Penny Pritzker
Case Number: 2:2014cv02539
Filed: November 17, 2014
Court: Arizona District Court
Office: Phoenix Division Office
County: Maricopa
Presiding Judge: Douglas L Rayes
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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
February 21, 2017 97 Opinion or Order of the Court *ORDER granting 73 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 92 Plaintiff's Amended Motion for Sanctions. The Clerk shall enter judgment for Defendant and against Plaintiff on all claims, terminate all remaining motions, and close this case. Signed by Judge Douglas L Rayes on 2/17/17.(DXD) *Modified on 2/21/2017 to correct party association as to the motions as stated in the attached order. (MMO)

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

Search for this case: Rutt v. Pritzker
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Beverly T Rutt
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: Penny Pritzker
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?