Martin v. Mars Petcare
Plaintiff: Patty Martin
Defendant: Mars Petcare
Case Number: 2:2009cv00363
Filed: May 5, 2009
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
Office: Columbus Office
County: FRANKLIN
Presiding Judge: Edmund A Sargus
Presiding Judge: Terence P Kemp
Nature of Suit: Plaintiff
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983 Civil Rights (Employment Discrimination)
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
December 16, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 41 OPINION AND ORDER: The Court grants the Defendant's 28 MOTION for Summary Judgment. Signed by Magistrate Judge Terence P Kemp on 12/16/2010. (er1)
June 11, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 24 PROTECTIVE ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Terence P Kemp on 06/11/2010. (sr)
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 Ohio Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Martin v. Mars Petcare
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Patty Martin
Represented By: William J O'Malley
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: Mars Petcare
Represented By: William J Barath
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?