Morgan v. Jim Sigel Enterprises, Inc.
Ray Morgan |
Jim Sigel Enterprises, Inc. |
1:2013cv01509 |
August 26, 2013 |
US District Court for the District of Oregon |
Medford (1) Office |
Owen M. Panner |
Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment |
42 U.S.C. ยง 12111 Americans With Disabilities Act |
Plaintiff |
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Document Text |
---|
Filing 90 ORDER: Denying Motion for Attorney Fees 87 ; Denying Taxation of Costs. 88 . Signed on 9/30/2014 by Judge Owen M. Panner. (jkm) |
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 Oregon 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
Search for this case: Morgan v. Jim Sigel Enterprises, Inc. | |
---|---|
Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Plaintiff: Ray Morgan | |
Represented By: | Michael W. Franell |
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: Jim Sigel Enterprises, Inc. | |
Represented By: | Molly Jo Mullen |
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.