Coker v. Donahoe
Plaintiff: Daniel C Coker
Defendant: Patrick Donahoe
Case Number: 2:2014cv02093
Filed: April 29, 2014
Court: US District Court for the Central District of Illinois
Office: Urbana Office
County: Vermilion
Presiding Judge: Harold A. Baker
Presiding Judge: David G. Bernthal
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331
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
May 3, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 170 FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND OPINION entered by Judge Harold A. Baker on 5/3/2016. Judgment is entered in favor of the defendants, and against the plaintiff. Parties to bear their own costs. All pending motions are moot. Case Terminated. See written Opinion.(DS, ilcd)
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 Illinois Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Coker v. Donahoe
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Daniel C Coker
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: Patrick Donahoe
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?