Mauldin v. International Surfacing Systems et al
| Ray Mauldin |
| International Surfacing Systems, Valley Slurry Seal and Basic Resources, Inc. |
| 2:2013cv00253 |
| February 8, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of California |
| Sacramento Office |
| Sacramento |
| Edmund F. Brennan |
| Morrison C. England |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 Civil Rights |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
45
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 04/16/18 ORDERING that, pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(ii), this matter is DISMISSED with prejudice. Neither party shall seek an award of attorney's fees and costs from the Court. (Benson, A.)
|
|
Filing
24
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 4/12/13 ORDERING that the claims in this case shall be resolved in binding arbitration and that this action is stayed during the pendency of the arbitration. If the case is resolved in arbitration without any post-arbitration motion being filed in this Court, then the parties will file a stipulation dismissing this action as soon as the case is resolved.(Becknal, R)
|
|
Filing
19
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 2/15/2013 and agreed between the parties that plaintiff may file a second amended complaint.(Yin, K)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
