Pilgrims Pride Corporation v. MDL Fair Labor Standards Act Litigation

Movant: Pilgrims Pride Corporation
Respondent: MDL Fair Labor Standards Act Litigation and Dennis Michael Lynn
Case Number: 1:2009cv01043
Filed: September 15, 2009
Court: Arkansas Western District Court
Office: El Dorado Office
County: U.S., Outside State
Presiding Judge: Harry F. Barnes
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: 28:0157 Motion for Withdrawal of Reference
Jury Demanded By: None

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

Search for this case: Pilgrims Pride Corporation v. MDL Fair Labor Standards Act Litigation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Movant: Pilgrims Pride Corporation
Represented By: Stephen A Youngman
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 ]
Respondent: MDL Fair Labor Standards Act Litigation
Represented By: Joseph F Postnikoff
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 ]
Respondent: Dennis Michael Lynn
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.