Lambdin v. Aerotek Commercial Staffing et al
| Brandy Brewer Lambdin |
| Aerotek Commercial Staffing and American Background Information Services, Inc |
| 3:2010cv00280 |
| June 28, 2010 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee |
| Knoxville Office |
| Campbell |
| H Bruce Guyton |
| Thomas A Varlan |
| Assault, Libel, and Slander |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
54
ORDER that the Court ACCEPTS IN WHOLE the Report and Recommendation 51 and DENIES plaintiff's Motion 45 to Remand to State Court. Signed by District Judge Thomas A Varlan on 10/28/11. (ABF)
|
|
Filing
41
ORDER that Aeroteks motion to dismiss second amended complaint 25 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part; plaintiffs motion for continuance 30 is DENIED; plaintiffs motion to file third amended complaint 33 is DENIED as moot; a nd plaintiffs revised motion to file third amended complaint 35 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Given this disposition, plaintiff is GRANTED leave to amend her second amended complaint and file an amended complaint consistent with this Order . However, plaintiff is DENIED leave to amend in respect to the following claims: plaintiffs claim against Aerotek for breach of the duties of good faith and fair dealing; plaintiffs FCRA claim against Aerotek; plaintiffs false light invasion of priv acy claim against Aerotek; and plaintiffs TCPA claims against Aerotek. Leave to amend is GRANTED in respect to plaintiffs claim against Aerotek for tortious interference with a current or prospective employment relationship, plaintiffs amendment addi ng Verifi as a defendant, and in respect to the other claims and allegations contained in the proposed third amended complaint. Plaintiff is DIRECTED, within fourteen (14) days of the entry of this Order, to file an amended complaint consistent with what is stated herein. Signed by District Judge Thomas A Varlan on 8/25/11. (ABF)
|
|
Filing
14
MEMORANDUM, OPINION AND ORDER that defendants first joint motion to dismiss 5 isDENIED as moot and defendants second joint motion to dismiss 10 is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is GRANTED to the extent that the FCRA claims alleged by plaintiff against Aerotek are DISMISSED, plaintiffs procurement of a breach of contract claim is DISMISSED as to both Aerotek and ABI, and plaintiffs false light invasion of privacy claim is DISMISSED as to both Aerotek and ABI . The motion is DENIED to the extent that plaintiffs state law claims against ABI are not preempted by the FCRA and plaintiff has stated a claim for intentional interference with a current or prospective employment relationship. Signed by District Judge Thomas A Varlan on 9/30/10. (ABF)
|
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 Tennessee Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
