Chapman v. S.O.S. Steel Company, Inc. et al

Plaintiff: Lowell Chapman
Defendant: S.O.S. Steel Company, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan and S.O.S. Steel Company, Inc.
Case Number: 5:2007cv00018
Filed: January 3, 2007
Court: California Northern District Court
Office: San Jose Office
County: Santa Clara
Referring Judge: Patricia V. Trumbull
Presiding Judge: Ronald M. Whyte
Nature of Suit: Labor: E.R.I.S.A.
Cause of Action: 29:1001 E.R.I.S.A.: Employee Retirement
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: Chapman v. S.O.S. Steel Company, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: S.O.S. Steel Company, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan
Represented By: Charles M. Dyke
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: S.O.S. Steel Company, Inc.
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 ]
Plaintiff: Lowell Chapman
Represented By: John Henry McSpadden
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?