SOMERS v. EXPRESS SCRIPTS HOLDINGS

SOMERS v. EXPRESS SCRIPTS HOLDINGS

Plaintiff:	BRIAN M. SOMERS
Defendant:	EXPRESS SCRIPTS HOLDINGS
Case Number:	1:2015cv01424
Filed:	September 9, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office:	Indianapolis Office
Presiding Judge:	Denise K. LaRue
Presiding Judge:	Jane Magnus-Stinson
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
April 11, 2017	Filing 73 ORDER - For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART Express Scripts' Motion to Strike, 63 , to the extent that it strikes one statement, as described above, from Mr. Somers' statement of material facts, but DENIES the remainder of Express Scripts' Motion to Strike; and GRANTS Mr. Somers' Motion to Strike Express Scripts' proffered medical record, 65 , and to replace [58-12] with [67-1]; and DENIES Express Scripts' Motion for Summary Judgment, 52 , with re spect to Express Scripts' statute of limitations defense, the hostile work environment claims both as to religious and sex harassment, and the constructive discharge claim; and GRANTS Express Scripts' Motion for Summary Judgment, 52 , as to the retaliation claim. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 4/11/2017. (JRB)
June 29, 2016	Filing 39 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS - For the reasons stated herein, the Court DENIES Express' 19 Partial Motion to Dismiss. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/29/2016. (GSO)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 11, 2017

Filing 73 ORDER - For the foregoing reasons, the Court GRANTS IN PART Express Scripts' Motion to Strike, 63 , to the extent that it strikes one statement, as described above, from Mr. Somers' statement of material facts, but DENIES the remainder of Express Scripts' Motion to Strike; and GRANTS Mr. Somers' Motion to Strike Express Scripts' proffered medical record, 65 , and to replace [58-12] with [67-1]; and DENIES Express Scripts' Motion for Summary Judgment, 52 , with re spect to Express Scripts' statute of limitations defense, the hostile work environment claims both as to religious and sex harassment, and the constructive discharge claim; and GRANTS Express Scripts' Motion for Summary Judgment, 52 , as to the retaliation claim. SEE ORDER. Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 4/11/2017. (JRB)

June 29, 2016

Filing 39 ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S PARTIAL MOTION TO DISMISS - For the reasons stated herein, the Court DENIES Express' 19 Partial Motion to Dismiss. (See Order.) Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 6/29/2016. (GSO)

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: SOMERS v. EXPRESS SCRIPTS HOLDINGS
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Defendant: EXPRESS SCRIPTS HOLDINGS
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: BRIAN M. SOMERS
Represented By:	Gregory A. Stowers
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?