Burke v. Stream Global Services, Inc. et al

Defendant: Stream International, Inc. and Stream Global Services, Inc.
Plaintiff: Charles A. Burke
Case Number: 3:2011cv01224
Filed: October 11, 2011
Court: Oregon District Court
Office: Portland Office
Presiding Judge: Michael W. Mosman
Nature of Suit: Labor: Other
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Other Contract
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

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: Burke v. Stream Global Services, Inc. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Stream International, Inc.
Represented By: Andrew R. Escobar
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Stream Global Services, Inc.
Represented By: Andrew R. Escobar
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Charles A. Burke
Represented By: Karen A. Moore
Represented By: A.E. Bud Bailey
Represented By: James Dana Pinney
Represented By: Cheyenne K Powelson
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 [ 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.