Campbell v. Verizon Wireless

Campbell v. Verizon Wireless

Plaintiff:	DeMarc Campbell
Defendant:	Verizon Wireless
Case Number:	1:2009cv03220
Filed:	December 15, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office:	Aiken Office
County:	Aiken
Presiding Judge:	Joseph R McCrorey
Presiding Judge:	Margaret B Seymour
Nature of Suit:	Plaintiff
Cause of Action:	42 U.S.C. § 12117 Americans with Disabilities Act
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
December 8, 2010	Filing 37 ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS granting 22 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Prosecution, filed by Verizon Wireless, granting 11 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Verizon Wireless, granting 21 Motion to Compel as to the defendant's request f or $72.35 in fees charged by the court reporter related to plaintiff's deposition, and denied as to all other requests re 31 Report and Recommendations, filed by Verizon Wireless. Signed by Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 12/8/2010. (asni, )
November 17, 2010	Filing 31 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that defendant's first and second motions to dismiss be granted and this action be dismissed with prejudice. FURTHER RECOMMENDED defendant's second motion to compel be granted as to defendant's request for � 36;72.35 in fees and denied as to all other requests, re 22 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution filed by Verizon Wireless, 11 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Verizon Wireless, 21 Second MOTION to Compel filed by Verizon Wireless, Objections to R&R due by 12/6/2010. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joseph R McCrorey on November 17, 2010. (kbos)

Date Filed

Document Text

December 8, 2010

Filing 37 ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS granting 22 Motion to Dismiss/Lack of Prosecution, filed by Verizon Wireless, granting 11 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Verizon Wireless, granting 21 Motion to Compel as to the defendant's request f or $72.35 in fees charged by the court reporter related to plaintiff's deposition, and denied as to all other requests re 31 Report and Recommendations, filed by Verizon Wireless. Signed by Honorable Margaret B Seymour on 12/8/2010. (asni, )

November 17, 2010

Filing 31 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that defendant's first and second motions to dismiss be granted and this action be dismissed with prejudice. FURTHER RECOMMENDED defendant's second motion to compel be granted as to defendant's request for � 36;72.35 in fees and denied as to all other requests, re 22 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Prosecution filed by Verizon Wireless, 11 MOTION to Dismiss filed by Verizon Wireless, 21 Second MOTION to Compel filed by Verizon Wireless, Objections to R&R due by 12/6/2010. Signed by Magistrate Judge Joseph R McCrorey on November 17, 2010. (kbos)

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: Campbell v. Verizon Wireless
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: DeMarc Campbell
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: Verizon Wireless
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?