Thibodeaux v. The Dow Chemical Company et al
| Joshua Thibodeaux |
| ABC Insurance, Olin Corporation and The Dow Chemical Company |
| 3:2016cv00567 |
| August 26, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana |
| Baton Rouge Office |
| Brian A. Jackson |
| Richard L. Bourgeois |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
50
RULING and ORDER granting 23 Motion for Summary Judgment. All claims brought by Plaintiff, Joshua Thibodeaux against Defendant, the Dow Chemical Company, are hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Plaintiff's 46 Motion for Continuance is DENIED AS MOOT. Signed by Chief Judge Brian A. Jackson on 5/17/2018. (SGO)
|
|
Filing
19
ORDER: Dow shall serve a copy of the instant 18 Motion for Contempt and to Compel and this Order on the non-party Daronda M. Parker-Lathan, LCSW within 5 days of the date of this Order at the addresses listed. Within 7 days of the date of this order, Dow shall file into the record a certificate of service and methods of service used to on the non-party Daronda M. Parker-Lathan, LCSW. Within 7 Days of the date she is served, non-party Daronda M. Parker-Lathan, LCSW shall file a response to 18 MOTION into the record. Signed by Magistrate Judge Richard L. Bourgeois, Jr. on 7/31/2017. (LLH)
|
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 Louisiana Middle District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
