Peterson v. SCIS Air Security et al
| Lisa C. Peterson |
| SCIS Air Security and LSG Sky Chefs |
| 2:2016cv00849 |
| August 1, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Utah |
| Central Office |
| Salt Lake |
| Brooke C. Wells |
| Civil Rights: Jobs |
| 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 Job Discrimination (Sex) |
| 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
42
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER-granting in part and denying in part 37 Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Amended Complaint. Ms. Peterson's Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Amended Complaint under Rule 15(d), which the Court construes as a Motion to Amend under Rule 15(a), is granted only as it relates to Sky Chefs employee Chola. The Motion is denied as it relates to Sky Chef's other employees for reasons of futility. Signed by Judge David Sam on 12/27/17. (jmr)
|
|
Filing
36
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER-granting in part and denying in part 29 Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint. For the reasons stated, Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint 29 is granted as to SCIS, and denied as to Sky Chefs. See Order for details. Signed by Judge David Sam on 9/27/17. (jmr)
|
|
Filing
24
MEMORANDUM DECISION and ORDER granting 5 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. The Third Claim is dismissed without prejudice. The Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Claims are dismissed with prejudice. Signed by Judge David Sam on 3/9/2017. (blh)
|
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 Utah 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.
