Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.

Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw

M.F. v. Carpenter Technology Corporation

Date: 06-06-2022

Case Number: 5:20-cv-01827-MHH

Judge: Madeline Hughes Haikala

Court: United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (Midison County)

Plaintiff's Attorney:





Click Here to Watch How To Find A Lawyer by Kent Morlan



Click Here For The Best Huntsville Civil Rights Lawyer Directory





Defendant's Attorney: Thomas A. David and Kimberly R. Ward

Description:
Huntsville, Alabama civil rights lawyer represented Plaintiff, who sued Defendant on a job discrimination in employment theory under 42 U.S.C. 2000e.

Outcome:
06/06/2022 21 TEXT ORDER: Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties jointly stipulate to dismissal of this action with prejudice with each party to bear its own costs. (Doc. 20 ). The Court asks the Clerk of Court to please close the file. (KEK) (Entered: 06/06/2022)
Plaintiff's Experts:
Defendant's Experts:
Comments:

About This Case

What was the outcome of M.F. v. Carpenter Technology Corporation?

The outcome was: 06/06/2022 21 TEXT ORDER: Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties jointly stipulate to dismissal of this action with prejudice with each party to bear its own costs. (Doc. 20 ). The Court asks the Clerk of Court to please close the file. (KEK) (Entered: 06/06/2022)

Which court heard M.F. v. Carpenter Technology Corporation?

This case was heard in United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (Midison County), AL. The presiding judge was Madeline Hughes Haikala.

Who were the attorneys in M.F. v. Carpenter Technology Corporation?

Plaintiff's attorney: Click Here to Watch How To Find A Lawyer by Kent Morlan Click Here For The Best Huntsville Civil Rights Lawyer Directory. Defendant's attorney: Thomas A. David and Kimberly R. Ward.

When was M.F. v. Carpenter Technology Corporation decided?

This case was decided on June 6, 2022.