Burton et al v. Real Property Investment Services Incorporated

Justia Dockets & Filings Ninth Circuit Arizona District Court Burton et al v. Real Property Investment Services Incorporated

Burton et al v. Real Property Investment Services Incorporated

Plaintiff:	Michael Burton
Defendant:	Real Property Investment Services Incorporated
Case Number:	3:2010cv08081
Filed:	May 20, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office:	Prescott Division Office
County:	Coconino
Presiding Judge:	Lawrence O Anderson
Nature of Suit:	Employment
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 1981
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
August 9, 2010	Filing 26 ORDER that Dft's 10 Motion to Sever Plas' Claims is granted; that the Clerk of the Court shall assign a new case number for Pla Barbara Gammons and assign that case to this Magistrate Judge. The first-named Pla, Michael Burton, and his la wsuit shall remain with the present case number; that Plas' counsel shall file Amended Complaints in the new case and in this case, asserting the claims of each Pla against Dft. The Amended Complaints shall be filed on or before 09/07/10; that Pla Barbara Gammons shall pay the filing fee in the new case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence O Anderson on 08/09/10. (ESL)
July 28, 2010	Filing 24 ORDER that Defendant's 9 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Sixth Cause of Action, is GRANTED and Plaintiffs' Sixth Cause of Action is hereby dismissed with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's request for oral argument, is DENIED as unnecessary. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence O Anderson on 07/27/10. (ESL)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 9, 2010

Filing 26 ORDER that Dft's 10 Motion to Sever Plas' Claims is granted; that the Clerk of the Court shall assign a new case number for Pla Barbara Gammons and assign that case to this Magistrate Judge. The first-named Pla, Michael Burton, and his la wsuit shall remain with the present case number; that Plas' counsel shall file Amended Complaints in the new case and in this case, asserting the claims of each Pla against Dft. The Amended Complaints shall be filed on or before 09/07/10; that Pla Barbara Gammons shall pay the filing fee in the new case. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence O Anderson on 08/09/10. (ESL)

July 28, 2010

Filing 24 ORDER that Defendant's 9 Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Sixth Cause of Action, is GRANTED and Plaintiffs' Sixth Cause of Action is hereby dismissed with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's request for oral argument, is DENIED as unnecessary. Signed by Magistrate Judge Lawrence O Anderson on 07/27/10. (ESL)

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: Burton et al v. Real Property Investment Services Incorporated
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: Real Property Investment Services Incorporated
Represented By:	David Frederick Gomez
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 ]
Plaintiff: Michael Burton
Represented By:	Paul David Friedman
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?