Nash v. CVS Caremark Corporation et al
| William Nash |
| CVS Caremark Corporation and Holiday CVS LLC |
| 1:2009cv00079 |
| February 23, 2009 |
| US District Court for the District of Rhode Island |
| Labor: Fair Standards Office |
| Providence |
| Lincoln D. Almond |
| William E Smith |
| Plaintiff |
| Federal Question |
| 29:201 Denial of Overtime Compensation |
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
44
OPINION AND ORDER adopting 31 Report and Recommendations; denying 12 Motion to Dismiss. So Ordered by Judge William E. Smith on 2/9/10. (Jackson, Ryan)
|
|
Filing
31
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that CVS's Motion to Dismiss be DENIED. 12 MOTION to Dismiss For Lack Of Subject Matter Jurisdiction filed by Holiday CVS LLC, CVS Caremark Corporation Objections to R&R due by 12/1/2009. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond on 11/13/09. (Noel, Jeannine)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER denying 4 Motion to Transfer Case; adopting 9 Report and Recommendations. So Ordered by Judge William E. Smith on 7/29/09. (Jackson, Ryan)
|
|
Filing
9
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS recommending that Defendants' Motion to Change Venue be DENIED 4 MOTION to Transfer Case filed by Holiday CVS LLC, CVS Caremark Corporation Objections to R&R due by 7/16/2009. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Lincoln D. Almond on 7/1/09. (Noel, Jeannine)
|
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 Rhode Island 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.
