Nowosielski v. ABS Lincs SC Inc et al
Plaintiff: Paul Nowosielski
Defendant: ABS Lincs SC Inc and Palmetto Behavioral Health Holdings Inc
Case Number: 2:2012cv00573
Filed: February 29, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Charleston Office
County: Dorchester
Presiding Judge: Patrick Michael Duffy
Presiding Judge: Bristow Marchant
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 2601
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
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: Nowosielski v. ABS Lincs SC Inc et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Paul Nowosielski
Represented By: A Christopher Potts
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: ABS Lincs SC 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 ]
Defendant: Palmetto Behavioral Health Holdings 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?