Hayden v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
Plaintiff: Gerald W. Hayden
Defendant: Cisco Systems, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2012cv00464
Filed: March 27, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of Connecticut
Office: New Haven Office
County: Fairfield
Presiding Judge: Vanessa L. Bryant
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1441
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 2, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 27 ORDER denying Plaintiff's 24 Application to Vacate Arbitration Decision. See the attached Memorandum of Decision. Signed by Judge Vanessa L. Bryant on 9/2/14.(De Palma, C)
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 Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Hayden v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Gerald W. Hayden
Represented By: James F. Sullivan
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: Cisco Systems, Inc.
Represented By: Jason R. Stanevich
Represented By: Lori B. Alexander
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?