Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc.

Plaintiff: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Defendant: Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc.
Case Number: 2:2011cv02153
Filed: August 16, 2011
Court: Arkansas Western District Court
Office: Fort Smith Office
County: Sebastian
Presiding Judge: P. K. Holmes
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42:12101
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
June 24, 2015 318 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER and FINAL JUDGMENT as set forth denying 288 Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law; granting 290 Motion to Alter Judgment ; denying 292 Motion to Alter Judgment and denying 294 Motion for New Trial; further EEOC's request for costs as itemized in its amended Bill of Costs is granted in the total amount of $5,438.16 as set forth. Signed by Honorable Timothy L. Brooks on June 24, 2015. (rw)
January 16, 2015 284 Opinion or Order of the Court JUDGMENT in favor of Equal Employment Opportunity Commission against Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. in the amount of $119,612.97. Signed by Honorable Timothy L. Brooks on January 16, 2015. (rw)
April 21, 2014 145 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER re: the pre-trial conference scheduled for 10:00am, 5/14/14, as set forth. Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on April 21, 2014. (lw)
June 26, 2013 140 Opinion or Order of the Court AMENDED AND SUBSTITUTED ORDER re order 138 denying 87 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc., and denying 84 MOTION for Summary Judgment filed by Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Further case stayed, as set forth. Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren, June 26, 2013.(sh) Modified to add text on 6/26/2013 (sh).
June 24, 2013 138 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying 84 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment and denying 87 denying Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on June 24, 2013. (sh)
April 26, 2013 83 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 82 Motion to Dismiss Amended and Substituted Complaint of Intervenor. That the Amended and Substituted Complaint of Intervenor Charles Grams is dismissed without prejudice. Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on April 26, 2013. (lw)
March 21, 2013 77 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 76 Amended Motion to Dismiss Count Two of Amended and Substituted Complaint of Intervenor Charles Grams, alleging violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act, and the motion is dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on March 21, 2013. (sh)
May 29, 2012 64 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying without prejudice 35 Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, denying as moot 49 defendant's Rule 56(d) Motion and denying as moot 52 defendant's unopposed motion for leave to file a reply brief in support of its Rule 56(d). Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on May 29, 2012. (sh)
April 23, 2012 55 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER denying Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Charles Grams' Complaint in Intervention 28 ; granting 43 Defendant's Motion to Strike and the Amended and Substituted Complaint of Intervenor Charles Grams doc. 30 is stricken from the record and held for naught; Denying in part and granting in part 17 the MOTION is granted to the extent that is seeks clarification of the EEOC Complaint, and denied in all other respects. EEOC is directed to file an Amended Complaint clarifying it s "policy violation" claim within ten days of the date of this order; granting Defendant's motion to file and Amended Complaint 46 ; and denying Defendant's Unopposed MOTION for Leave to File A Reply Brief in Support of its Motion to Strike Grams' Amended Complaint in Intervention 48 . Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on April 23, 2012. (sh)
January 25, 2012 25 Opinion or Order of the Court ORDER granting 14 Motion to Intervene, Charles Gram is directed to file his Complaint In Intervention no later than 7 days from the date of this Order. Further granting in part and denying in part 19 Motion to Respond to Documents 17 and 18 a nd to File an Amended Complaint in Intervention. The motion is granted insofar as Grams seeks leave to respond to documents 17 and 18 , and is allowed 21 days from the date of this Order to file such response. The motion is denied insofar as Grams seeks leave to filed an Amended Complaint in Intervention. Signed by Honorable Jimm Larry Hendren on January 25, 2012. (lw)

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: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Represented By: Pamela Dixon
Represented By: Markeisha K. Savage
Represented By: Deidre Smith
Represented By: Faye A Williams
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: Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc.
Represented By: James Harold Hanson
Represented By: Matthew Horan
Represented By: Sara L. Pettinger
Represented By: Don A. Smith
Represented By: Stephen Campbell Smith
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?