Wiggins v. Sports Services
Plaintiff: Marshall E. Wiggins
Defendant: Sports Services
Case Number: 4:2012cv01114
Filed: June 21, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - City
Presiding Judge: Henry E. Autrey
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000
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
March 29, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 19 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER re: 14 3 ORDERED that Plaintiff Marshall E. Wiggins's Motion to Appoint Counsel [ECF No. 3] is DENIED. FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Sports Services's Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 14] is GRANTED. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Autrey on 3/29/13. (CEL)
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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Wiggins v. Sports Services
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Marshall E. Wiggins
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: Sports Services
Represented By: Mark J. Bremer
Represented By: David A. Castleman
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?