Meyer v. Town of Wake Forest et al
| Steven F. Meyer |
| Town of Wake Forest, Eric Keravuori, Mitzi Franklin, Virginia Jones, Mark Williams and Roe O'Donnell |
| 5:2016cv00348 |
| June 8, 2016 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina |
| Western Division Office |
| WAKE |
| James C. Dever |
| Family and Medical Leave Act |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 2601 |
| 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
80
ORDER granting 79 First MOTION Transfer to Magistrate Judge Gates. Based on the parties' consent to the motion and for the additional reasons stated therein, it is ORDERED that the motion is allowed and the foregoing matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Gates pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c)(1). Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 6/19/2019. (Collins, S.)
|
|
Filing
62
ORDER granting in part and denying in part 48 Motion for Summary Judgment. The parties are DIRECTED to confer and file within 21 days from date of entry of this order a joint status report specifying the estimated length of the trial, three alternative suggested trial dates, and suggested alternative dispute resolution techniques to be employed prior to trial in attempt to resolve the remaining issues between the parties. Upon receipt of the parties report, the court will enter such further order as is warranted regarding pretrial and trial scheduling. Signed by District Judge Louise Wood Flanagan on 9/28/2018. (Collins, S.)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
- 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.
