STATE OF INDIANA et al v. HERNANDEZ
1:2006cv01185 |
August 4, 2006 |
US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
Indianapolis Office |
William T. Lawrence |
Richard L. Young |
Labor: Reporting/Disclosure |
29 U.S.C. ยง 1132 E.R.I.S.A.-Employee Benefits |
None |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 1 ORDER on Application for Leave to Sue Under 29 USC 501 (relative to IP 06-95-MISC): In light of the divided authority on whether unions may sue under 501,the applicant in this case has taken the cautious approach of at least seeking the court approva l that 501(b) requires for suits by union members. The court believes that such leave is not necessary, but the request is understandable and leave is hereby GRANTED. The application shows good cause for allowing suit against Hernandez under 501 base d on the verified allegations of the complaint and the criminal indictment in the Northern District of Indiana. The Clerk of the Court shall file the Complaint lodged with the court and shall assign judicial officers by the usual random method. Signed by Judge David Frank Hamilton on 8/4/2006. (LSC, ) |
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 Indiana Southern 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: STATE OF INDIANA et al v. HERNANDEZ | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | 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.