Sauer v. BELFOR USA Group, Inc.
Plaintiff: Kristin Sauer
Defendant: BELFOR USA Group, Inc.
Case Number: 1:2015cv11882
Filed: May 21, 2015
Court: US District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Office: Boston Office
County: Middlesex
Presiding Judge: Nathaniel M. Gorton
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 28:1441
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
September 7, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 36 Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton: ENDORSED ORDER entered. MEMORANDUM AND ORDERFor the foregoing reasons,1) plaintiffs claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., are DISMISSED and2) defendants motion to dismiss (Docket No. 26) is DENIED. So ordered.(Caruso, Stephanie)
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 Massachusetts District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Sauer v. BELFOR USA Group, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: BELFOR USA Group, Inc.
Represented By: Alexander M. McIntyre, Jr.
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: Kristin Sauer
Represented By: Andrew P. Hanson
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?