CAMARGO v. ALICK SMITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, INC.

Justia Dockets & Filings Third Circuit Pennsylvania Eastern District CAMARGO v. ALICK SMITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, INC.

CAMARGO v. ALICK SMITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, INC.

Plaintiff:	ENRIQUE CAMARGO
Defendant:	ALICK SMITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, INC.
Case Number:	5:2015cv06215
Filed:	November 18, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
Office:	Allentown Office
County:	Northampton
Presiding Judge:	JOSEPH F. LEESON
Nature of Suit:	Civil Rights: Employment
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
November 4, 2016	Filing 42 ORDER THAT 1. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO ENFORCE THE PARTIE'S SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, ECF NO. 38, IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. 2. NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 2, 2016, DEFENDANTS ALICK SMITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, INC. AND ALICK SMITH PROPERTIES, LLC SHALL COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT THE PARTIES REACHED DURING THE JUNE 15 2016, SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE, ETC. 3. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL ENTER A DEFAULT AGAINST BOTH DEFENDANTS. 4. PLAINTIFF SHALL SERVE A COPY OF THIS ORDER ON BOTH DEFENDANTS, TOGETHER WITH A COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE, AND FILE PROOF OF SERVICE WITH THE COURT. 5. PLAINTIFF SHALL FILE PAPER COPIES OF EXHIBITS B AND D TO HIS MOTION WITH THE CLERK OF COURT, AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL FILE THOSE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL. 6. IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS, PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOSEPH F. LEESON, JR ON 11/3/2016. 11/4/2016 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO UNREPS AND E-MAILED.(lbs, )

Date Filed

Document Text

November 4, 2016

Filing 42 ORDER THAT 1. PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO ENFORCE THE PARTIE'S SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT, ECF NO. 38, IS GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. 2. NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 2, 2016, DEFENDANTS ALICK SMITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, INC. AND ALICK SMITH PROPERTIES, LLC SHALL COMPLY WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS UNDER THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THAT THE PARTIES REACHED DURING THE JUNE 15 2016, SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE, ETC. 3. THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL ENTER A DEFAULT AGAINST BOTH DEFENDANTS. 4. PLAINTIFF SHALL SERVE A COPY OF THIS ORDER ON BOTH DEFENDANTS, TOGETHER WITH A COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE, AND FILE PROOF OF SERVICE WITH THE COURT. 5. PLAINTIFF SHALL FILE PAPER COPIES OF EXHIBITS B AND D TO HIS MOTION WITH THE CLERK OF COURT, AND THE CLERK OF COURT SHALL FILE THOSE DOCUMENTS UNDER SEAL. 6. IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS, PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IS DENIED. SIGNED BY HONORABLE JOSEPH F. LEESON, JR ON 11/3/2016. 11/4/2016 ENTERED AND COPIES MAILED TO UNREPS AND E-MAILED.(lbs, )

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 Pennsylvania Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: CAMARGO v. ALICK SMITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, INC.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: ENRIQUE CAMARGO
Represented By:	ARI RISSON KARPF
Represented By:	TIMOTHY S. SEILER
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: ALICK SMITH GENERAL CONTRACTOR, INC.
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?