Washington v. United Parcel Service
Plaintiff: Deena Washington
Defendant: United Parcel Service
Case Number: 6:2020cv00077
Filed: October 27, 2020
Court: US District Court for the District of Montana
Presiding Judge: Sam E Haddon
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42:2000e
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 27, 2020. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 27, 2020 Filing 2 Summons Issued as to United Parcel Service. Original emailed to counsel for service. (HEG)
October 27, 2020 Filing fee received: $ 400, receipt number 0977-2564920 (HEG)
October 27, 2020 Filing 1 COMPLAINT against United Parcel Service, filed by Deena Washington. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet) (HEG)

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 Montana District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Washington v. United Parcel Service
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Deena Washington
Represented By: Torrance Lee Coburn
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: United Parcel Service
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?