Masud v. Rohr-Grove Motors, Inc.
Zobaida Masud |
Rhor-Grove Motors, Incorporated |
1:2013cv06419 |
September 8, 2013 |
US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
Chicago Office |
Cook |
Joan B. Gottschall |
Employment |
28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 196 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order. The motions 192 and 194 are granted in part and denied in part. The parties are directed to agree on a concise joint statement similar in form to the sample joint statement in the appendix to Local Rule 54.3, and pla intiff shall attach the joint statement to her motion for attorney's fees. By agreeing to a more concise joint statement, defendant does not waive any position it has articulated in its motion 194 or its version of the joint statement submitte d as Exhibit 1 to that motion. Plaintiff shall file its motion for fees by October 21, 2016. Defendant shall file its response by November 14, 2016. Plaintiff shall file its reply by November 28, 2016. The Court denies leave to file any supplemental fee petition until after the Court rules on the forthcoming petition for the fees plaintiff disclosed on July 28, 2016. Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 9/19/2016:Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf, ) |
Filing 187 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order. The Court denies both bills of costs and orders each party to bear its own costs. Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 6/22/2016. Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf, ) |
Filing 169 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order. Following a jury verdict for plaintiff on a Title VII hostile work environment claim, but against her on her retaliation claims, defendant Arlington Nissan has filed a motion to strike any back pay remedy. The Court grants that motion 164 . Civil case terminated. Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 5/5/2016. Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf, ) |
Filing 93 MEMORANDUM Opinion and Order. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted in part and denied in part. The motion is denied as to plaintiff's state law retaliatory discharge claim, her Title VII retaliation claim, and her hostile work environment harassment claim. The motion is granted as to plaintiff's disparate treatment discrimination claim, to the extent that claim rests on any employment actions other than those that form the basis for her surviving retaliation and hostile work environment claims. A status hearing is set for November 5, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. Signed by the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso on 10/13/2015. Notice mailed by judge's staff (ntf, ) |
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 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
Search for this case: Masud v. Rohr-Grove Motors, Inc. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Zobaida Masud | |
Represented By: | Charles Thomas Siedlecki |
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: Rhor-Grove Motors, Incorporated | |
Represented By: | Glenn R. Gaffney |
Represented By: | Justin R. Gaffney |
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.