WILLOUGHBY v. PRI-PAK
Plaintiff: KATHLEEN WILLOUGHBY
Defendant: PRI-PAK
Case Number: 4:2015cv00061
Filed: May 18, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana
Office: New Albany Office
Presiding Judge: Sarah Evans Barker
Presiding Judge: Debra McVicker Lynch
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 27, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER granting 25 Motion for Summary Judgment. Final Judgment shall enter accordingly. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Sarah Evans Barker on 1/27/2017 (copy mailed to plaintiff). (LBT)
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: WILLOUGHBY v. PRI-PAK
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: PRI-PAK
Represented By: David L. Swider
Represented By: Philip R. Zimmerly
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: KATHLEEN WILLOUGHBY
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?