MORRISON v. CHATHAM UNIVERSITY
Plaintiff: DANIELLE MORRISON
Defendant: CHATHAM UNIVERSITY
Case Number: 2:2016cv00476
Filed: April 20, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
Office: Pittsburgh Office
County: Allegheny
Presiding Judge: Nora Barry Fischer
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Education
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
September 8, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 33 MEMORANDUM OPINION indicating that, for reasons more fully stated within, the Court grants Defendant Chatham University's Partial Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint, with prejudice. An appropriate Order follows. Signed by Judge Nora Barry Fischer on 9/8/16. (jg)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: MORRISON v. CHATHAM UNIVERSITY
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: DANIELLE MORRISON
Represented By: James T. Carney
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: CHATHAM UNIVERSITY
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?