SMITH v. ELI LILLY & COMPANY
Plaintiff: GERALD SMITH
Defendant: ELI LILLY & COMPANY
Case Number: 1:2010cv01615
Filed: December 14, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge: Tim A. Baker
Presiding Judge: Jane Magnus-Stinson
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981 Civil Rights
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
June 5, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 71 ORDER denying 57 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment - For the reasons explained herein, the Court DENIES Lilly's Motion for Summary Judgment on Mr. Smiths claim for disparate pay based on his 2005 performance. Dkt. 57 . (SEE ORDER). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/5/2012. (JKS)
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 Indiana Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: SMITH v. ELI LILLY & COMPANY
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: ELI LILLY & COMPANY
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 ]
Plaintiff: GERALD SMITH
Represented By: Martha M. McBrayer
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?