Gibson et al v. Milwaukee County et al
| James R Gibson and Tamara Rohr |
| Milwaukee County, Milwaukee County Sheriffs Department and David A Clarke, Jr |
| 2:2012cv00657 |
| June 27, 2012 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin |
| Milwaukee Office |
| Milwaukee |
| Lynn Adelman |
| Family and Medical Leave Act |
| 29 U.S.C. ยง 2601 |
| 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
77
DECISION AND ORDER signed by Judge Lynn Adelman on 3/5/15 that the defendants motion for summary judgment 51 is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Further ordering that summary judgment is entered in favor of Rohr on the issue of whether the defe ndants denied her a reasonable accommodation by not allowing her to participate in the Sheriffs light-duty program on a temporary basis. Finally ordering that a telephonic status conference will be held on March 25, 2015 at 10:30 a.m. for the purpose of scheduling further proceedings. The court will initiate the call. (cc: all counsel) (dm)
|
|
Filing
61
ORDER on Stipulated Briefing Schedule signed by Judge Lynn Adelman on 10/31/14, that the plaintiffs shall submit their response as required under Local Rule 56(b)(2) no later than November 17, 2014, and Defendants shall submit their reply under Local Rule 56(b)(3) no later than December 8, 2014. (cc: all counsel)(lls)
|
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 Wisconsin Eastern 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.
