Dunn v. Lyman School District 42-1

Plaintiff: Mark Dunn
Defendant: Lyman School District 42-1
Case Number: 3:2013cv03004
Filed: January 24, 2013
Court: South Dakota District Court
Office: Central Division Office
County: Brule
Presiding Judge: Roberto A. Lange
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 29:621 Job Discrimination (Age)
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
August 4, 2014 56 Opinion or Order of the Court OPINION AND ORDER granting in part and denying in part 41 Motion for Summary Judgment (denying on Count I but granted on Counts II and III). Signed by U.S. District Judge Roberto A. Lange on 8/4/14. (DJP)

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: Dunn v. Lyman School District 42-1
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Mark Dunn
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 [ Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Lyman School District 42-1
Represented By: Naomi R. Cromwell
Represented By: Jessica L. Filler
Represented By: Wade Lee Fischer
Represented By: Richard Paul Tieszen
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 [ 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?