McInerney v. City of San Jose
| Joseph McInerney |
| City of San Jose |
| 3:2011mc80127 |
| June 3, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of California |
| San Francisco Office |
| James Ware |
| Other |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on June 17, 2011. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 1 Received Document: Petition to File Action by Joseph McInerney. (Attachments: # 1 Complaint, # 2 Motion to Proceed IFP)(ga, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 6/3/2011) |
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 Northern 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
| Search for this case: McInerney v. City of San Jose | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Joseph McInerney | |
| 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 ] |
| Defendant: City of San Jose | |
| 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.
