Marzec v. Starbucks Corp. et al
Plaintiff: Halina Marzec
Defendant: Starbucks Corp. and Starbucks at 395 Third Avenue, New York City
Case Number: 1:2008cv01216
Filed: March 25, 2008
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office: P.I.: Other Office
County: Kings
Presiding Judge: Steven M. Gold
Presiding Judge: Eric N. Vitaliano
Nature of Suit: None
Cause of Action: Diversity
Jury Demanded By: 28:1332 Diversity-Notice of Removal
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 New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Marzec v. Starbucks Corp. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Halina Marzec
Represented By: Darius A. Marzec
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: Starbucks Corp.
Represented By: George N. Tompkins, III
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: Starbucks at 395 Third Avenue, New York City
Represented By: George N. Tompkins, III
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?