Woods v. Nazdar Company
Plaintiff: Jerrell Woods
Defendant: Nazdar Company
Case Number: 2:2012cv02411
Filed: July 2, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of Kansas
Office: Kansas City Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: James P. O'Hara
Presiding Judge: Kathryn H. Vratil
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
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
October 17, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 22 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER overruling plaintiff Jerrell Woods' 8 Motion for Review. Signed by Chief Judge Kathryn H. Vratil on 10/17/2012. Mailed to pro se plaintiff Jerrell Woods by regular mail. (mg)
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 Kansas District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Woods v. Nazdar Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Nazdar Company
Represented By: Daniel B. Boatright
Represented By: Kelly M. Nash
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: Jerrell Woods
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?