Kluttz v. Worldpac
Plaintiff: Thomas S Kluttz
Defendant: Worldpac
Case Number: 4:2012cv02009
Filed: July 5, 2012
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Office: Houston Office
County: Anderson
Presiding Judge: Kenneth M. Hoyt
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1983
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
December 19, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 57 MEMORANDUM OPINION and ORDER granting 28 MOTION to Dismiss 27 Amended Complaint. The defendants alternative Rule 12(b)(6) challenge to the plaintiffs disparate impact claim is DENIED as moot. The plaintiffs claims for retaliation and disparate treatment premised on sex and age remain.(Signed by Judge Kenneth M. Hoyt) Parties notified.(chorace)
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 Texas Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Kluttz v. Worldpac
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Worldpac
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 ]
Plaintiff: Thomas S Kluttz
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?