Williams v. Basic Contracting Services, Inc.

Justia Dockets & Filings Fourth Circuit West Virginia Southern District Williams v. Basic Contracting Services, Inc.

Williams v. Basic Contracting Services, Inc.

Plaintiff:	Regina A. Williams
Defendant:	Basic Contracting Services, Inc.
Case Number:	5:2009cv00049
Filed:	January 15, 2009
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia
Office:	Other Statutory Actions Office
County:	Kanawha
Presiding Judge:	Thomas E. Johnston
Presiding Judge:
Nature of Suit:	Plaintiff
Cause of Action:	Federal Question
Jury Demanded By:	28:1331 Fed. Question

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
August 17, 2010	Filing 124 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated herein, BCS's 35 MOTION for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: 1. With respect to Williams' first cause of action, for intentional infliction of emotiona l distress, BSC's Motion is GRANTED; 2. With respect to Williams' second cause of action, for wrongful dishcharge, BCS's Motion is DENIED; 3. With respect to Williams' third cause of action, for violation of 41 U.S.C. Section 265 , BCS's Motion is GRANTED; 4. With respect to Williams' fourth cause of action, for retaliatory discharge in violation of the Federal False Claims Act, BCS's 87 MOTION is DENIED. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 8/17/2010. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (mls)
November 9, 2009	Filing 30 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying Basic Contracting Services Inc.'s 17 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 11/9/2009. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (cds)

Date Filed

Document Text

August 17, 2010

Filing 124 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER: For the reasons stated herein, BCS's 35 MOTION for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART as follows: 1. With respect to Williams' first cause of action, for intentional infliction of emotiona l distress, BSC's Motion is GRANTED; 2. With respect to Williams' second cause of action, for wrongful dishcharge, BCS's Motion is DENIED; 3. With respect to Williams' third cause of action, for violation of 41 U.S.C. Section 265 , BCS's Motion is GRANTED; 4. With respect to Williams' fourth cause of action, for retaliatory discharge in violation of the Federal False Claims Act, BCS's 87 MOTION is DENIED. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 8/17/2010. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (mls)

November 9, 2009

Filing 30 MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER denying Basic Contracting Services Inc.'s 17 MOTION for Judgment on the Pleadings or, in the Alternative, Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Judge Thomas E. Johnston on 11/9/2009. (cc: attys; any unrepresented party) (cds)

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 West Virginia Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Williams v. Basic Contracting Services, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Regina A. Williams
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: Basic Contracting Services, 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?