Diamantoulis v. Qwest Communications
Plaintiff: Maria Diamantoulis
Defendant: Qwest Communications
Case Number: 4:2007cv00272
Filed: June 8, 2007
Court: US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office: Tucson Division Office
County: Pima
Presiding Judge: Frank R Zapata
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 30, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 67 ORDER ADOPTING 64 Report and Recommendations, It is further ordered that dfts qwest motion for summary jgm is granted. Jgm shall enter accordingly. Signed by Judge Frank R Zapata on 09/30/10. (LMF)
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: Diamantoulis v. Qwest Communications
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Maria Diamantoulis
Represented By: Mary Judge Ryan
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: Qwest Communications
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?