DiPilato v. 7-Eleven, Inc. et al
| Angela DiPilato |
| 7-Eleven, Inc., Jeanne Lynch, Martina Hagler and Arthur Rubinett |
| 7:2007cv07636 |
| August 28, 2007 |
| U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| White Plains Office |
| Westchester |
| Charles L. Brieant |
| Civil Rights: Other |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 Job Discrimination (Age) |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
46
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS:...On the basis of the foregoing, summary judgment is DENIED as to:1)the claim against Defendants 7-Eleven and Lynch under New York State Human Rights Law Sec 296(5)(b); and 2)the claim against all defendants under New York Civil Rights Law Sec 40-c, The Order denying leave to amend is AFFIRMED.The Clerk is respectfully directed to terminate the pending motion (Doc.13). for 36 Report and Recommendations,, Motions terminated: 13 MOTION to Dismiss. filed by 7-Eleven, Inc., Martina Hagler, Jeanne Lynch, Arthur Rubinett. SO ORDERED (Signed by Judge Cathy Seibel on 8/25/2009) The Clerk's Office Has Mailed Copies.(rj)
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER:...Simply stated, plaintiff has not adequately alleged these additional claims.Accordingly,plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint is DENIED. SO ORDERED (Signed by Magistrate Judge George A. Yanthis on 3/19/2009) The Clerk's Office Has Mailed Copies.(rj)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
