Kuslick v. Roszczewski
Plaintiff: Cheryl Rose Kuslick
Defendant: James Roszczewski
Case Number: 1:2009cv12307
Filed: June 15, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Office: Bay City Office
County: Iosco
Presiding Judge: Binder
Presiding Judge: Ludington
Nature of Suit: Other
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights Act
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
March 16, 2012 Opinion or Order Filing 47 ORDER granting 41 Motion to Compel. Signed by District Judge Thomas L. Ludington. (SGam)
December 23, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER denying 9 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Thomas L Ludington. (SGam)
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 Michigan Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kuslick v. Roszczewski
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: James Roszczewski
Represented By: James T. Farrell
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: Cheryl Rose Kuslick
Represented By: Thomas M. Loeb
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?