Trierweiler v. Wells Fargo Bank
Plaintiff: Kimberli Trierweiler
Defendant: Wells Fargo Bank
Case Number: 1:2009cv01001
Filed: January 26, 2009
Court: US District Court for the District of South Dakota
Office: Civil Rights: Jobs Office
County: Codington
Presiding Judge: Charles B. Kornmann
Nature of Suit: Both
Cause of Action: Federal Question
Jury Demanded By: 42:2000e Job Discrimination (Employment)

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
January 19, 2010 Opinion or Order Filing 40 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying 32 Motion to Strike ; granting 20 Motion for Summary Judgment. This matter is dismissed with prejudice and without costs. Signed by Charles B. Kornmann on January 19, 2010. (DLC)
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 Dakota District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Trierweiler v. Wells Fargo Bank
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kimberli Trierweiler
Represented By: Stephanie E. Pochop
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: Wells Fargo Bank
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?