McLean v. Broadfoot
Plaintiff: Murrill L. McLean
Defendant: Philip A. Broadfoot
Case Number: 4:2010cv00019
Filed: May 21, 2010
Court: US District Court for the Western District of Virginia
Office: Danville Office
Presiding Judge: Jackson L. Kiser
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Jobs
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 2000 e Job Discrimination (Employment)
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 13, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 29 ORDER granting 16 Motion for Extension of Time but holding Plaintiff's counsel in civil contempt and imposing a fine of $500.00; granting 12 Motion for Summary Judgment as to Title VII claim and declining to excercise supplemental jurisdiction; dismissing case from the docket. Signed by Judge Jackson L. Kiser on 5/13/11. (ham)
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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: McLean v. Broadfoot
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Philip A. Broadfoot
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: Murrill L. McLean
Represented By: Henry Lavander Marsh, III
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?