Keef v. M.A. Mortenson Company
Plaintiff: David Keef
Defendant: M.A. Mortenson Company
Case Number: 0:2007cv03915
Filed: September 7, 2007
Court: US District Court for the District of Minnesota
Office: DMN Office
County: XX US, Outside State
Presiding Judge: Franklin L. Noel
Presiding Judge: James M. Rosenbaum
Nature of Suit: Labor: Fair Standards
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 206 Collect Unpaid Wages
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
February 24, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 105 ORDER granting 93 Motion for decertification. This action is no longer a collective action. The opt-in plaintiffs' claims are dismissed without prejudice. (Written Opinion). Signed by Judge James M. Rosenbaum on 02/23/2009. (kmc)
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 Minnesota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Keef v. M.A. Mortenson Company
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Keef
Represented By: Robert-NA W Thompson
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: M.A. Mortenson Company
Represented By: David J Goldstein
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?