LIGHT v. CARRANZA
| CHARLES L. LIGHT |
| JOVITA CARRANZA |
| 1:2008cv01074 |
| June 23, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Columbia |
| Civil Rights: Jobs Office |
| 88888 |
| Ricardo M. Urbina |
| Plaintiff |
| U.S. Government Defendant |
| 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment) |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
64
MEMORANDUM OPINION explaining the reasoning behind the September 28, 2012 order 62 . Signed by Chief Judge Royce C. Lamberth on October 3, 2012. (lcrcl5)
|
|
Filing
22
MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge Ricardo M. Urbina on 03/25/2010. (lcrmu1)
|
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 District Of Columbia 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
| Search for this case: LIGHT v. CARRANZA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: CHARLES L. LIGHT | |
| 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: JOVITA CARRANZA | |
| 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.
