BOYD v. KEYSTONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

Justia Dockets & Filings Seventh Circuit Indiana Southern District BOYD v. KEYSTONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

BOYD v. KEYSTONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

Plaintiff:	NORETTA F. BOYD
Defendant:	KEYSTONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
Case Number:	1:2014cv00119
Filed:	January 27, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge:	Mark J. Dinsmore
Presiding Judge:	William T. Lawrence
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
July 20, 2015	Filing 90 ENTRY ON MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT: For the reasons set forth above, Keystone's motion to dismiss Boyd's second amended complaint (Dkt. No. 68) is GRANTED with regard to Counts I, II, III, V, and VI. It is also GRA NTED with regard to the age discrimination claim in Count IV. Accordingly, the only claims that currently remain in this case are race and gender discrimination claims against Keystone pursuant to Title VII; the motion to dismiss is DENIED a s to those claims. Keystone's motion to strike (Dkt. No. 80) is DENIED. As explained above, if Boyd wishes to pursue any claims against New Wishard or other defendants, she shall file a third amended complaint that includes those claims within 21 days of the date of this Entry *SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION*. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 7/20/2015. Copy sent via US Mail. (DW)
October 14, 2014	Filing 53 ORDER - Keystone's 15 motion to dismiss is GRANTED in its entirety. However, Boyd's claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and no final judgment will enter at this time in order to give Boyd an opportunity to file an amended complaint that corrects the deficiencies in the current complaint. In light of this ruling, the Court DENIES Boyd's 21 30 motions for summary judgment. Keystone's 31 motion to strike is DENIED AS MOOT. If Boyd wishes to continue with this sui t, she shall file an amended complaint by October 31, 2014. The failure to file a timely amended complaint will result in final judgment being entered against Boyd in this case. Copy mailed to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 10/14/2014. (AH)

Date Filed

Document Text

July 20, 2015

Filing 90 ENTRY ON MOTION TO DISMISS SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT: For the reasons set forth above, Keystone's motion to dismiss Boyd's second amended complaint (Dkt. No. 68) is GRANTED with regard to Counts I, II, III, V, and VI. It is also GRA NTED with regard to the age discrimination claim in Count IV. Accordingly, the only claims that currently remain in this case are race and gender discrimination claims against Keystone pursuant to Title VII; the motion to dismiss is DENIED a s to those claims. Keystone's motion to strike (Dkt. No. 80) is DENIED. As explained above, if Boyd wishes to pursue any claims against New Wishard or other defendants, she shall file a third amended complaint that includes those claims within 21 days of the date of this Entry ***SEE ENTRY FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION***. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 7/20/2015. Copy sent via US Mail. (DW)

October 14, 2014

Filing 53 ORDER - Keystone's 15 motion to dismiss is GRANTED in its entirety. However, Boyd's claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and no final judgment will enter at this time in order to give Boyd an opportunity to file an amended complaint that corrects the deficiencies in the current complaint. In light of this ruling, the Court DENIES Boyd's 21 30 motions for summary judgment. Keystone's 31 motion to strike is DENIED AS MOOT. If Boyd wishes to continue with this sui t, she shall file an amended complaint by October 31, 2014. The failure to file a timely amended complaint will result in final judgment being entered against Boyd in this case. Copy mailed to Plaintiff via US Mail. Signed by Judge William T. Lawrence on 10/14/2014. (AH)

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: BOYD v. KEYSTONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: NORETTA F. BOYD
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: KEYSTONE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
Represented By:	Matthew Alan Brown
Represented By:	Stuart R. Buttrick
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?