McNamee v. Starbucks Coffee Company

McNamee v. Starbucks Coffee Company

Plaintiff:	Sharon McNamee
Defendant:	Starbucks Coffee Company
Case Number:	6:2010cv06508
Filed:	September 7, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of New York
Office:	Rochester Office
County:	Ontario
Presiding Judge:	Charles J. Siragusa
Nature of Suit:	Employment
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 2000
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
December 19, 2012	Filing 68 DECISION AND ORDER granting 51 Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants motion for summary judgment [#51] is granted and this action is dismissed. The Court hereby certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), that any appeal from this Order wo uld not be taken in good faith and leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals as a poor person is denied. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). Further requests to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis should be directed on motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in accordance with Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 12/19/12. CLERK TO FOLLOW UP (KAP)
April 15, 2011	Filing 16 DECISION & ORDER denying without prejudice 10 Motion to Appoint Counsel. It is plaintiff's responsibility, therefore, to retain an attorney or press forward with this action pro se. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 4/15/2011. (KAH)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 19, 2012

Filing 68 DECISION AND ORDER granting 51 Motion for Summary Judgment. Defendants motion for summary judgment [#51] is granted and this action is dismissed. The Court hereby certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), that any appeal from this Order wo uld not be taken in good faith and leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals as a poor person is denied. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438 (1962). Further requests to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis should be directed on motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in accordance with Rule 24 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.Signed by Hon. Charles J. Siragusa on 12/19/12. CLERK TO FOLLOW UP (KAP)

April 15, 2011

Filing 16 DECISION & ORDER denying without prejudice 10 Motion to Appoint Counsel. It is plaintiff's responsibility, therefore, to retain an attorney or press forward with this action pro se. Signed by Hon. Marian W. Payson on 4/15/2011. (KAH)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: McNamee v. Starbucks Coffee Company
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Sharon McNamee
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 Coffee Company
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?