Nanney v. United Parcel Service Inc

Plaintiff: Connie Nanney
Defendant: United Parcel Service Inc
Case Number: 4:2009cv00331
Filed: May 8, 2009
Court: Arkansas Eastern District Court
Office: Little Rock Office
County: Lonoke
Presiding Judge: James M. Moody
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: 42:12131 Americans with Disabilities Act
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
February 28, 2011 39 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER DISMISSING CASE with prejudice pursuant to a settlement reached by the parties. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 2/28/11. (kpr)
June 21, 2010 19 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER lifting the stay and allowing the parties to go forward with expert discovery. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 6/21/10. (bkp)

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 Arkansas Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Nanney v. United Parcel Service Inc
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Connie Nanney
Represented By: Luther Oneal Sutter
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: United Parcel Service Inc
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?