Haught v. The Wireless Center, Inc.
Plaintiff: Kimberly Haught
Defendant: The Wireless Center, Inc.
Case Number: 3:2016cv00942
Filed: November 30, 2016
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia
Office: Richmond Office
County: Rappahannock
Presiding Judge: Henry E. Hudson
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29 U.S.C. ยง 201
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
May 18, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 14 MEMORANDUM OPINION. See Opinion for details. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Hudson on 5/18/2017. (sbea, )
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 Virginia Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Haught v. The Wireless Center, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Kimberly Haught
Represented By: Zev Hillel Antell
Represented By: Harris Dewey Butler, III
Represented By: Paul Mark Falabella
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: The Wireless Center, Inc.
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?