Davis v. Jackson Laboratory

Davis v. Jackson Laboratory

Plaintiff:	Kristina Y. Davis
Defendant:	The Jackson Laboratory
Case Number:	2:2011cv01944
Filed:	July 25, 2011
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of California
Office:	Sacramento Office
County:	Sacramento
Presiding Judge:	Dale A. Drozd
Presiding Judge:	Morrison C. England
Nature of Suit:	Employment
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1441
Jury Demanded By:	None

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
September 11, 2012	Filing 14 STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 9/10/12 ORDERING that the action titled Kristina Y. Davis vs. The Jackson Laboratory, Case No. 2:11-cv-01944-MCE-DAD is dismissed with prejudice in its entirety pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. Each party will bear her or its own costs and attorneys' fees. CASE CLOSED (Becknal, R)
August 23, 2012	Filing 12 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 8/23/2012 ORDERING that, pursuant to the parties' Stipulation, discovery motions and Plaintiff's deposition related to any alcohol-related line of questioning will not be sub ject to the 9/21/2012 discovery cut-off. As to the alcohol-related issue only, the discovery deadline will remain open until the court rules on whether the alcohol-related questions are permitted at Plaintiffs deposition, and Plaintiff's deposition has concluded as to that issue only (if the court permits any questioning). All other discovery must be completed by the 9/21/2012 discovery cut-off. (Zignago, K.)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 11, 2012

Filing 14 STIPULATION AND ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 9/10/12 ORDERING that the action titled Kristina Y. Davis vs. The Jackson Laboratory, Case No. 2:11-cv-01944-MCE-DAD is dismissed with prejudice in its entirety pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. Each party will bear her or its own costs and attorneys' fees. CASE CLOSED (Becknal, R)

August 23, 2012

Filing 12 STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 8/23/2012 ORDERING that, pursuant to the parties' Stipulation, discovery motions and Plaintiff's deposition related to any alcohol-related line of questioning will not be sub ject to the 9/21/2012 discovery cut-off. As to the alcohol-related issue only, the discovery deadline will remain open until the court rules on whether the alcohol-related questions are permitted at Plaintiffs deposition, and Plaintiff's deposition has concluded as to that issue only (if the court permits any questioning). All other discovery must be completed by the 9/21/2012 discovery cut-off. (Zignago, K.)

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

Search for this case: Davis v. Jackson Laboratory
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: The Jackson Laboratory
Represented By:	D Gregory Valenza
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: Kristina Y. Davis
Represented By:	Kevin Wayne Harris
Represented By:	Leo Francis Donahue
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?