Warnken v. CVS Corporation
Plaintiff: Robert Warnke
Defendant: CVS Corporation
Case Number: 2:2009cv00397
Filed: January 30, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office: Civil Rights: Jobs Office
County: Suffolk
Presiding Judge: Arthur D. Spatt
Presiding Judge: A. Kathleen Tomlinson
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 29:621 Job Discrimination (Age)

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
February 24, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 15 ORDER re 13 Motion to Quash. For the reasons set forth in the attached Plaintiff's Motion to Quash the non-party subpoenas is hereby GRANTED. An Amended Case Management and Scheduling Order will be entered separately. Ordered by Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson on 2/24/2010. (Tobin, Ellen)
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: Warnken v. CVS Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Robert Warnke
Represented By: Troy L. Kessler
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: CVS Corporation
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?