LONG v. LIBERTYWOOD NURSING CENTER et al
| BRIDGET M. LONG |
| LIBERTYWOOD NURSING CENTER, WILLIAM SCHUTZ and DEBBIE DRAUGHN |
| 1:2013cv00315 |
| April 17, 2013 |
| US District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina |
| NCMD Office |
| Davidson |
| L. PATRICK AULD |
| WILLIAM L. OSTEEN |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination) |
| Defendant |
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
65
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN JR. on 2/24/2015, that Plaintiff's Pro Se Motion/Request that the Court Subpoena Witnesses for Trial (Doc. 28 ) is DENIED AS MOOT. FURTHER that Plaintiff's Pro S e Motion/ Request that Mediation Fees be Waived (Doc. 29 ) is GRANTED. Plaintiff will not be required to pay mediation costs. FURTHER that Plaintiff's Motion Request to file Report in Court Records of Mediation Session Results and Reli ef from Assessed Payment of $500 (Doc. 48 ) is DENIED. FURTHER that Defendant's Motion to Strike Plaintiff's Affidavit (Doc. 53 ) is DENIED. FURTHER that Defendant's Motion to Strike Two of Plaintiff's Exhibi ts (Doc. 56 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendant's Motion to Strike page 28 of Plaintiff's Brief (Doc. 52 ) is GRANTED, but Defendant's Motion to Strike page 23-24 of Plaintiff's Brief is DENIED. FURTHER that Plaintiff's Pre-trial Motion For United States Constitutional Law Clarity Concerns And Civil Rights Court Proceedings (Doc. 61 ) is DENIED AS MOOT. FINALLY ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 44 ) is GRANTED and that this action is DISMISSED. A judgment consistent with this Memorandum Opinion and Order and the Memorandum Opinion and Order filed January 28, 2014, will be entered contemporaneously herewith. (Daniel, J)
|
|
Filing
34
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Signed by MAG/JUDGE L. PATRICK AULD on 7/23/2014, that Defendants Motion to Compel Initial Disclosures (Docket Entry 31 ) is GRANTED, except as to Defendant's requests for sanctions, expense-shifting, and mo dification of the Scheduling Order. FURTHER that Plaintiff must serve upon Defendant, on or before August 1, 2014, a list of names of individuals likely to have discoverable information, including such individuals' addresses, telephone numbers, and the subjects of that information. Failure to comply with this Order may result in dismissal of this action.(Daniel, J)
|
|
Filing
22
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER. Signed by CHIEF JUDGE WILLIAM L. OSTEEN JR. on 1/28/2014, that Defendants' motion to dismiss (Doc. 13 , as more specifically stated in Doc. 14 ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is DENIE D as to Plaintiff's claim of retaliation in violation of Title VII as described in the Complaint and related attachment. The motion is GRANTED as to any other claim for relief. FURTHER, that Defendants' motion to dismiss is GRANTED as to Defendants William Schutz and Debbie Draughn, and those Defendants are DISMISSED from this action. (Daniel, J)
|
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 North Carolina Middle 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.
