FERRANTE v. MAS MEDICAL STAFFING
Plaintiff: STEPHANIE M FERRANTE
Defendant: MAS MEDICAL STAFFING
Case Number: 2:2013cv00211
Filed: June 6, 2013
Court: US District Court for the District of Maine
Office: Portland Office
County: Cumberland
Presiding Judge: JOHN H. RICH
Presiding Judge: JOHN A. WOODCOCK
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 Diversity-Employment Discrimination
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
March 26, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 51 ORDER granting in part and denying in part 38 Defendant MAS Medical Staffing's Motion for Summary Judgment. By JUDGE JOHN A. WOODCOCK, JR. (MFS)
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 Maine District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: FERRANTE v. MAS MEDICAL STAFFING
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: STEPHANIE M FERRANTE
Represented By: GUY D. LORANGER
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 ]
Defendant: MAS MEDICAL STAFFING
Represented By: TAWNY L. ALVAREZ
Represented By: ROBERT C. BROOKS
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?