Mauro v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
Plaintiff: Charlene Mauro
Defendant: Costco Wholesale Corporation
Case Number: 1:2009cv01391
Filed: April 3, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office: Brooklyn Office
County: Kings
Presiding Judge: Nicholas G. Garaufis
Presiding Judge: Viktor V. Pohorelsky
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1442 Notice of Removal
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
July 22, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 57 ORDER denying 47 / 48 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Viktor V. Pohorelsky on 7/22/2013. (Somekh, Sogol)
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: Mauro v. Costco Wholesale Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Charlene Mauro
Represented By: Michael S. Lazarowitz
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: Costco Wholesale Corporation
Represented By: William P. Nolan
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?