Armstrong v. Labortory Corporation of America
| Serita Kay Armstrong |
| Labortory Corporation of America |
| 3:2018cv00556 |
| October 12, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Western District of North Carolina |
| David S Cayer |
| Max O Cogburn |
| Frank D Whitney |
| Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 12101 |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on December 6, 2018. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
ORDER granting Deft's #7 Motion for Extension of Time to Answer or Otherwise Respond re: #1 Complaint. Labortory Corporation of America answer due 12/14/2018. Signed by Magistrate Judge David S. Cayer on 12/06/2018. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.) (ejb)
|
| Case reassigned to District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr. Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney no longer assigned to the case. This is your only notice - you will not receive a separate document.(thh) |
| Filing 8 Corporate Disclosure Statement by Labortory Corporation of America (Bartis, Patricia) |
| Filing 7 MOTION for Extension of Time to Answer re: #1 Complaint by Labortory Corporation of America. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order)(Bartis, Patricia). Motions referred to David S. Cayer. |
| Filing 6 NOTICE of Appearance by Patricia T. Bartis on behalf of Labortory Corporation of America (Bartis, Patricia) |
| Filing 5 SUMMONS Returned Executed Labortory Corporation of America served on 11/1/2018, answer due 11/23/2018. (brl) |
| Filing 4 Summons Issued Electronically to US Marshal for service as to Labortory Corporation of America. (Attachments: #1 UMS285)(brl) |
|
Filing 3
ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Chief Judge Frank D. Whitney on 10/23/2018. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(brl)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION (Sealed - Participants) to Proceed in forma pauperis by Serita Kay Armstrong. (brl) |
| Filing 1 Pro Se COMPLAINT against Labortory Corporation of America, filed by Serita Kay Armstrong. (Attachments: #1 Summons)(brl) |
| Clerk's Entry and Service of #Initial Scheduling Order and #Certificate of Initial Attorney FRCP 26(f) Conference Form pursuant to the Standing Order Governing Civil Case Management before the Honorable Frank D. Whitney (3:07-mc-47 (Doc. No. 2)). The order was served conventionally. (brl) |
| Clerk's Entry and Service of #Case Assignment Packet. And #Initial Scheduling Order and Certificate of Initial Attorney FRCP 26(f) Conference Form pursuant to the Standing Order Governing Civil Case Management before the Honorable Frank D. Whitney (3:07-mc-47 (Doc. No. 2)). The document was served conventionally at case filing (brl) |
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.
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Armstrong v. Labortory Corporation of America | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: Labortory Corporation of America | |
| Represented By: | Patricia T. Bartis |
| 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: Serita Kay Armstrong | |
| 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.
