Shumate v. Chao
Plaintiff: David Shumate
Defendant: Elaine L. Chao
Case Number: 3:2018cv00068
Filed: January 30, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi
Office: Northern (Jackson) Office
County: Rankin
Presiding Judge: Linda R. Anderson
Presiding Judge: Halil S. Ozerden
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 621
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
January 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 50 ORDER granting in part and denying in part Defendant's Motion 41 for Summary Judgment. Signed by District Judge Halil S. Ozerden on January 10, 2020. (RN)
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: Shumate v. Chao
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: David Shumate
Represented By: Dennis L. Horn
Represented By: Leigh Horn
Represented By: Shirley Payne
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: Elaine L. Chao
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?