Bradford v. CVS Caremark Corp. et al
| Philip Bradford |
| CVS Caremark Corp. and CVS Pharmacy, Inc. |
| 1:2012cv01159 |
| April 4, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Georgia |
| Atlanta Office |
| Cobb |
| Thomas W. Thrash |
| Fair Labor Standards Act |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 216 |
| Plaintiff |
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
343
ORDER granting 329 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr on 10/27/2016. (jkl)
|
|
Filing
317
OPINION AND ORDER granting 296 Motion for Decertification. Signed by Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr on 8/6/15. (dr)
|
|
Filing
79
ORDER denying Plaintiff Bradford's 64 Motion for Summary Judgment; granting in part and denying in part 67 Motion for Summary Judgment and to Decertify the Collective Action. Granting CVS's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment and Denying Motion to Decertify the Collective Action. Signed by Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr on 10/10/2013. (ss)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER granting 32 Motion for Conditional Collective Action Certification and Issuance of Notice to Putative Class Members. The Court ORDERS the Defendant to provide the Plaintiff with a list of the names, addresses, and phone numbers of all RLPMs nationwide within three years prior to the date of this Order. The Court DIRECTS the parties to confer and jointly submit a proposed opt-in notice for Court approval.Signed by Judge Thomas W. Thrash, Jr on 2/1/2013. (ss)
|
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 Georgia Northern 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.
