Leavy v. FedEx Corporation
Plaintiff: Brenda Kay Leavy
Defendant: FedEx Corporation
Case Number: 2:2019cv02705
Filed: October 16, 2019
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Tennessee
Presiding Judge: John T Fowlkes
Referring Judge: Tu M Pham
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Americans with Disabilities - Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000e
Jury Demanded By: Plaintiff
Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on October 16, 2019. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed Document Text
October 16, 2019 Pursuant to Administrative Order 2013-05, this case has been assigned to the United States magistrate judge for management of all pretrial matters. Pursuant to Local Rule 4.1(b)(1), the plaintiff shall present the Clerk with a properly completed summons for each defendant, and the Clerk shall issue the summons(es) to the plaintiff for service on the defendant(s). (csf)
October 16, 2019 Filing 6 NOTICE TO COMPLY WITH PLAN FOR ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR): Pursuant to Section to 2.1 of the ADR Plan, all civil cases filed on or after Sept. 1, 2014, shall be referred automatically for ADR. For compliance requirements, refer to the ADR Plan at: http://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/pdf/content/ADRPlan.pdf (csf)
October 16, 2019 Filing 5 NOTICE OF RIGHT TO CONSENT TO THE EXERCISE OF CIVIL JURISDICTION BY A MAGISTRATE JUDGE Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636(c), Fed.R.Civ.P.73, and Local Rule 72.1, this Court has designated the Magistrate Judges of this District to conduct trials and otherwise dispose of any civil case that is filed in this Court. Your decision to consent, or not consent, to the referral of your case to a United States Magistrate Judge for trial and entry of a final judgment must be entirely voluntary. The judge or magistrate judge to whom the case has been assigned will not be informed of your decision unless all parties agree that the case may be referred to a magistrate judge for these specific purposes. A less than unanimous decision will not be communicated by this office to either the judge or magistrate judge. The consent form is available on the courts website at https://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/forms-and-applications.php (csf)
October 16, 2019 Filing 4 NOTICE OF CASE TRACKING ASSIGNMENT PURSUANT TO LOCAL RULE 16.2: Pursuant to Local Rule 16.2, this case has been assigned to the Standard track. http://www.tnwd.uscourts.gov/pdf/content/LocalRules.pdf (csf)
October 16, 2019 Filing 3 NOTICE: Signed agreement to receive notice of electronic filing (NEF) by Brenda Kay Leavy (csf)
October 16, 2019 Filing 2 Case initiation fee: PAID $ 400.00, receipt number M4676043784 (csf)
October 16, 2019 Filing 1 PRO SE COMPLAINT for Employment Discrimination filed by Brenda Kay Leavy against FedEx Corporation. (Attachments: #1 EEOC Documents with Notice of Right to Sue, #2 Judicial Cards)(csf)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Leavy v. FedEx Corporation
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Brenda Kay Leavy
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: FedEx Corporation
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?