Chamberlin v. CVS Caremark Corporation
Plaintiff: Amy Chamberlin
Defendant: CVS Caremark Corporation
Case Number: 4:2010cv01241
Filed: March 25, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of California
Office: Oakland Office
Presiding Judge: Phyllis J. Hamilton
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
May 10, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 9 STIPULATION AND ORDER TO REMAND ACTION TO STATE COURT re 8 Stipulation filed by CVS Caremark Corporation, ***Civil Case Terminated. Signed by Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton on 5/10/10. (nah, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/10/2010)
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: Chamberlin v. CVS Caremark Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Amy Chamberlin
Represented By: Robert B. Hancock
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: CVS Caremark Corporation
Represented By: Greg L. Johnson
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?