Flournoy v. Spartanburg Regional Medical Center
Plaintiff: Shaneka Sharday Flournoy
Defendant: Spartanburg Regional Medical Center
Case Number: 7:2012cv02792
Filed: September 25, 2012
Court: US District Court for the District of South Carolina
Office: Spartanburg Office
County: Spartanburg
Presiding Judge: Jacquelyn D Austin
Presiding Judge: Timothy M Cain
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42:2000 Job Discrimination (Race)
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
January 2, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 69 ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations 64 ; granting 35 Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 40 Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Honorable Timothy M Cain on 1/2/2014.(gpre, )
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: Flournoy v. Spartanburg Regional Medical Center
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Spartanburg Regional Medical Center
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 ]
Plaintiff: Shaneka Sharday Flournoy
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?