CURRY v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC et al
| ROBERT CURRY |
| UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC and TEAMSTERS LOCAL 623 |
| 2:2017cv02331 |
| May 23, 2017 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania |
| Philadelphia Office |
| Montgomery |
| GERALD J. PAPPERT |
| Labor/Management Relations |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 185 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
54
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER THAT UPS' MOTION IS GRANTED AND MATTHEW WEISBERG MUST PAY UPS $12,576.00. PAYMENT SHALL BE MADE BY CASHIER'S CHECK MADE OUT TO UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC AND SENT TO UPS' COUNSEL WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. LOCAL 623'S MOTION IS GRANTED AND MATTHEW WEISBERG MUST PAY LOCAL 623 $7,080.00 PAYMENT SHALL BE MADE BY CASHIER'S CHECK MADE OUT TO THE INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS LOCAL 623 AND SENT TO LOCAL 623'S COUNSEL WITHIN 45 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THIS ORDER. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GERALD J. PAPPERT ON 10/25/17. 10/25/17 ENTERED AND COPIES EMAILED.(rf, )
|
|
Filing
37
ORDER THAT UPS AND LOCAL 623 SHALL FILE ON OR BEFORE 9/14/17 FEE PETITIONS DETAILING THEIR COSTS, EXPENSES AND ATTORNEYS' FEES INCURRED BECAUSE OF CURRY'S FILING OF THE AMENDED COMPLAINT. MR. WEISBERG MAY FILE ON OR BEFORE 9/21/17 A RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS FEE PETITION; ETC.. SIGNED BY HONORABLE GERALD J. PAPPERT ON 8/30/17. 8/31/17 ENTERED AND E-MAILED.(jl, )
|
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 Pennsylvania Eastern 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.
