Pressley v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Plaintiff: Andjoura Sagel Pressley
Defendant: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Case Number: 4:2016cv01864
Filed: June 8, 2016
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Florence Office
County: Williamsburg
Presiding Judge: R Bryan Harwell
Presiding Judge: Thomas E Rogers
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
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
January 18, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 20 CONSENT CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER. Signed by Magistrate Judge Thomas E Rogers, III on 01/18/2017. (dsto, )
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: Pressley v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Andjoura Sagel Pressley
Represented By: William Stuart Duncan
Represented By: Raymond Carl Fischer
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: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Represented By: Lee Ellen Bagley
Represented By: Regina Hollins Lewis
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?