Brown v. Donahoe
Plaintiff: Diana Brown
Defendant: Patrick R Donahoe
Case Number: 4:2014cv00307
Filed: February 5, 2014
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Florence Office
County: Marion
Presiding Judge: Richard M Gergel
Presiding Judge: Thomas E Rogers
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2003
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
May 21, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 46 ORDER: The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 43 ) as an Order of the Court. Accordingly, Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 25 ) is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 5/21/2015. (prou, ) Modified on 5/22/2015 to edit text (prou, ).
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: Brown v. Donahoe
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Diana Brown
Represented By: Pheobe A Clark
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: Patrick R Donahoe
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?