Hoyt v. Career Systems Development et al
Darlene Hoyt |
Career Systems Development, Monika Spinks, Eugene Harris and DOES |
3:2007cv01733 |
August 31, 2007 |
US District Court for the Southern District of California |
San Diego Office |
San Diego |
Roger T. Benitez |
Leo S. Papas |
Civil Rights: Jobs |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1441 Petition for Removal |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 183 ORDER Denying 176 Motion for New Trial. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 3/22/2011. (knh) (jrl). |
Filing 172 CLERK'S JUDGMENT IT IS SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Plaintiff did not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that she was an employee of Career Systems Development Corporation; and that the Plaintiff did not establish by a preponderance of the evidence that Career Systems Development Corporation terminated her contract in a manner that violated the terms of the contract.(knh) |
Filing 144 ORDER Denying: 125 Ex Parte Motion to Disqualify Plaintiff's Counsel; Denying 130 Ex Parte Motion to Bifurcate Trial; denying 132 Ex Parte Supplemental Motion in Limine No. 1. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 6/30/2010. (knh) |
Filing 134 ORDER on Plaintiff's Motion in Limine. Granting in Part and Denying in Part Without Prejudice 100 Motion in Limine; Granting 101 Motion in Limine; Denying Without Prejudice 102 Motion in Limine; Granting in Part and Denying in Part Without Prejudice 103 Motion in Limine. Signed by Judge Roger T. Benitez on 5/3/2010. (knh) |
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 Southern 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.