Baskin v. Pepsi MidAmerica Co.

Plaintiff: Arthur Baskin
Defendant: Pepsi MidAmerica Co.
Case Number: 5:2013cv00030
Filed: February 28, 2013
Court: Kentucky Western District Court
Office: Paducah Office
County: McCracken
Presiding Judge: Thomas B. Russell
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed#Document Text
February 6, 2015 82 Opinion or Order of the Court MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER by Senior Judge Thomas B. Russell on 2/6/2015; re 51 Pretrial Compliance filed by Arthur Baskin, 50 Pretrial Compliance filed by Arthur Baskin, 52 Pretrial Compliance filed by Arthur Baskin ; see order for specificscc:counsel (KJA)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Baskin v. Pepsi MidAmerica Co.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Arthur Baskin
Represented By: Donald W. Sullenger
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: Pepsi MidAmerica Co.
Represented By: Douglas A. Welp(Designation Retained)
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.


Why Is My Information Online?