Kersten v. Loudon County Board of Education (TV1)
Plaintiff: Nancy Kersten
Defendant: Loudon County Board of Education
Case Number: 3:2012cv00584
Filed: November 8, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee
Office: Knoxville Office
County: Blount
Presiding Judge: H Bruce Guyton
Presiding Judge: Thomas A Varlan
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 621 Job Discrimination (Age)
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
November 7, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 61 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying Defendant's 29 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Chief District Judge Thomas A Varlan on 11/7/14. (JBR)
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 Tennessee Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kersten v. Loudon County Board of Education (TV1)
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Nancy Kersten
Represented By: Stephen T Hyder
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: Loudon County Board of Education
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?