Barrentine v. City of York, The
Plaintiff: Derrick Barrentine
Defendant: City of York, The
Case Number: 0:2017cv01055
Filed: April 24, 2017
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Rock Hill Office
County: York
Presiding Judge: Margaret B Seymour
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201
Jury Demanded By: Both

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
July 28, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 16 ORDER AND OPINION denying 10 Motion to Remand to State Court. Signed by Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 7/28/2017.(asni, )
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 South Carolina District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Barrentine v. City of York, The
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Derrick Barrentine
Represented By: Chan Mo Ahn
Represented By: David Bradley Jordan
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: City of York, The
Represented By: Thomas Foster Haselden
Represented By: Christopher W Johnson
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?