Pratt v. State of Hawaii, Department of Public Safety
Plaintiff: Keiron B. Pratt
Defendant: State of Hawaii, Department of Public Safety and Doe Defendants 1-10
Case Number: 1:2017cv00599
Filed: December 19, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of Hawaii
Office: Hawaii Office
County: Honolulu
Presiding Judge: RICHARD L. PUGLISI
Presiding Judge: DERRICK K. WATSON
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
April 9, 2019 Opinion or Order Filing 51 ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS re 38 - Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 4/9/2019. Pursuant to the foregoing, the Court GRANTS IN PART Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Dkt. No. 38). Counts I and II of the Second Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 34) are dismissed, except as to Pratt's retaliation claim arising out of his April 2017 change of title. Leave to amend is DENIED. (emt, )
November 8, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 33 ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS re: 24 .Excerpt of conclusion:"Counts I through III of the First Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 18) are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE . (footnote omitted). Leave to amend is GRANTED, consistent with the terms of this Order, and must be accomplished within thirty (30) days. (footnote omitted). Failure to do so will result in the dismissal of this action with prejudice." Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 11/8/2018. (afc)WRITTEN ORDER follows hearing held 10/12/2018. Minutes of hearing: ECF 30 .
April 9, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER GRANTING IN PART MOTION TO DISMISS re 9 - Signed by JUDGE DERRICK K. WATSON on 4/9/2018. "Pursuant to the foregoing discussion, the Court hereby GRANTS IN PART Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. No. 9). Counts I through V of the Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) are DISMISSED IN PART. Because amendment of the state law claims asserted in Count I (Retaliation), II (Hostile Work Environment), III (Sex Discrimination), IV (Whistleblowers Protection), and V (IIED) would be futile, leave to amend those claims is DENIED. Leave to amend the Title VII-based portions of Counts I, II, and III, however, is GRANTED, consistent with the terms of this Order." (emt, )
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 Hawaii District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Pratt v. State of Hawaii, Department of Public Safety
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Keiron B. Pratt
Represented By: Michael Jay Green
Represented By: Peter C. Hsieh
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: State of Hawaii, Department of Public Safety
Represented By: Maria C. Cook
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: Doe Defendants 1-10
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?