Gentry v. Jackson State University
Plaintiff: Laverne Gentry
Defendant: Jackson State University
Case Number: 3:2007cv00584
Filed: October 1, 2007
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Office: Jackson Office
County: Hinds
Presiding Judge: Tom S. Lee
Presiding Judge: James C. Sumner
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex)
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
May 27, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 134 ORDER granting 131 Motion to Stay or hold plaintiff's motion for attorney fees in abeyance until the appeal of the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit has concluded. Signed by District Judge Tom S. Lee on 5/27/10. (RRL)
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 Mississippi Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Gentry v. Jackson State University
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Laverne Gentry
Represented By: Lisa Mishune Ross
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: Jackson State University
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?