Koontz v. United Parcel Services et al

Plaintiff: Tracie Koontz
Defendant: United Parcel Services and Brian Schweinefus
Case Number: 5:2013cv00033
Filed: February 5, 2013
Court: Kentucky Eastern District Court
Office: Lexington Office
County: Fayette
Presiding Judge: Danny C. Reeves
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal - Employment Discrim
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

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 Kentucky Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Koontz v. United Parcel Services et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Tracie Koontz
Represented By: Thomas Bennett Clark
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: United Parcel Services
Represented By: David L. Hoskins
Represented By: Brandon W. Gearhart
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Brian Schweinefus
Represented By: Brandon W. Gearhart
Represented By: David L. Hoskins
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 [ 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.