Cunningham v. New York State Department of Labor et al
Case Number: 1:2005cv01127
Filed: September 7, 2005
Court: US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Office: Albany Office
Presiding Judge: David N. Hurd
Presiding Judge: Randolph F. Treece
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 2, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 59 AMENDED ORDER: the judgment filed on January 29, 2008 (Docket No. 45) is VACATED as to the Title VII and First Amendment retaliation claims; Defts may file and serve an answering memorandum of law on the First Amendment retaliation claim (See footnote 3) on or before September 18, 2009; and No further filings are permitted. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 9/2/2009. (see)
July 15, 2009 Opinion or Order Filing 54 DECISION & ORDER: that the judgment filed on 1/29/2008 (Docket No 45) is VACATED as to the Title VII retaliation claims; the parties are directed to file & serve further memorandums of law on the Title VII retaliation claims (see footnote 3) on or before 7/31/2009; and Answering memorandums of law may be filed & served on or before 8/14/2009. There will be no further oral argument. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 7/15/2009. (see)
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 Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Cunningham v. New York State Department of Labor et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | 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?