Motley v. L Brands Inc. et al
| Courtney Motley |
| L Brands Inc. and L Brands Direct Fulfillment Inc. |
| 3:2021cv00196 |
| July 19, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Ohio |
| Michael J Newman |
| Sharon L Ovington |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 27, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
NOTATION ORDER granting #2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington on 9/3/21. (rp)
|
| Filing 2 MOTION for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis (The Office of the Clerk is in possession of all necessary service documents) by Plaintiff Courtney Motley. (srb) |
| ...Case has been referred to Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington... (srb) |
| NOTICE OF CORRECTION re #1 Complaint. Counsel filed their Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis as an attachment to the complaint, which is incorrect. In the future please file your Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis as the lead document and attach the complaint, civil cover sheet and all other documents desired. Thank you. (srb) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT with JURY DEMAND against All Defendants, filed by Courtney Motley. (Attachments: #1 Civil Cover Sheet, #2 Exhibit EEOC Charge, #3 Exhibit Notice of Right to Sue, #4 Exhibit Application/Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis) (Li, Hui) |
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 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.
