Mazur v. Pacific Telesis Group Comprehensive Disability Benefits Plan et al

Plaintiff: Paul Mazur
Defendant: Pacific Telesis Group Comprehensive Disability Benefits Plan and AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No. 1
Case Number: 4:2007cv01904
Filed: April 4, 2007
Court: California Northern District Court
Office: Oakland Office
County: Sonoma
Presiding Judge: Wayne D. Brazil
Nature of Suit: Labor: E.R.I.S.A.
Cause of Action: 29:1132 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Benefits
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 California Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Mazur v. Pacific Telesis Group Comprehensive Disability Benefits Plan et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Paul Mazur
Represented By: Steven O. Teal
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: Pacific Telesis Group Comprehensive Disability Benefits Plan
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: AT&T Umbrella Benefit Plan No. 1
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?