Lorenzo v. Potter
Plaintiff: Chris Lorenzo
Defendant: John E. Potter
Case Number: 3:2011cv00358
Filed: March 23, 2011
Court: US District Court for the District of Oregon
Office: Portland Office
Presiding Judge: Paul Papak
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1331 Federal Question: Other Civil Rights
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
February 12, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 30 ORDER: The Court adopts Magistrate Judge Papak's Findings and Recommendation 28 . Accordingly, Defendant's motion for summary judgment 17 is granted. See 2-page order attached. Signed on 2/12/2013 by Judge Marco A. Hernandez. (mr)
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 Oregon District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Lorenzo v. Potter
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: John E. Potter
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: Chris Lorenzo
Represented By: Eric J. Fjelstad
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?