New Life Evangelistic Center, Inc. v. City of St. Louis
Plaintiff: New Life Evangelistic Center, Inc.
Defendant: St. Louis, Missouri, City of
Movant: Neighbors of NLEC Inc., 1401 Locust Street LLC, 1426 Washington Avenue LLC and Brad Waldrop
Case Number: 4:2015cv00395
Filed: March 3, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - City
Presiding Judge: John A. Ross
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 42 U.S.C. ยง 1981
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
February 22, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 176 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant City of St. Louis Motion for Sanctions (Doc. 166) is DENIED. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 2/22/2016. (KMS)
February 17, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 175 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Property Intervenors' Motion for Bill of Costs (Doc. 165 ) and Defendant City of St. Louis Motion Bill of Costs (Doc. 168 ) are DENIED.. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 2/17/16. (KKS)
October 27, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 163 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, because the Court finds that the RLUIP A claims (Counts I, VIII), the section 1983 claims (Counts II, Ill), and the declaratory judgment claim (Count VII) are not ripe for adjudication and the Court declines to exercise jurisdiction over the state law claims (Counts IV-VI), this action is DISMISSED without prejudice. A separate order of dismissal will accompany this memorandum and order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all remaining pending motions are DENIED, as Moot. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 10/27/15. (JAB)
July 9, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 85 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant's Affirmative Defense Asserting that RLUIPA is Unconstitutional (Doc. 43) and Motion to Strike Defendant's Affirmative Defenses 2, 3, and 9 (Doc. 44) are DENIED.. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 7/9/15. (LGK)
May 19, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 52 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Movants Brad A. Waldrop, Neighbors of NLEC, Inc., 1426 Washington Ave. LLC, and 1401 Locust Street, LLC's Motion to Intervene (Doc. 12) is GRANTED, in part and DENIED, in part. 1426 Washington Av e LLC and 1401 Locust Street, LLC shall be permitted to intervene in this action. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 1426 Washington Ave LLC and 1401 Locust Street, LLC's answer is due on or before May 20, 2015. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the City' ;s Motion to Join Required Party (Doc. 37) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that 1426 Washington Ave LLC and 1401 Locust Street, LLC shall have until May 26, 2015 to file their responses, if they so choose, to any currently pending motions before the Court. Any reply to these Parties' responses shall be due on or before May 29, 2015.. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 5/19/15. (LGK)
April 8, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 26 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Movants Brad A. Waldrop, Neighbors ofNLEC, LLC, 1426 Washington Ave. LLC, and 1401 Locust Street, LLC's Motion to Intervene (Doc. 12 ) is DENIED without prejudice. Signed by District Judge John A. Ross on 4/8/15. (ARL)
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 Missouri Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: New Life Evangelistic Center, Inc. v. City of St. Louis
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: New Life Evangelistic Center, Inc.
Represented By: Daniel Paul Dalton
Represented By: Todd A. Lubben
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: St. Louis, Missouri, City of
Represented By: Matthew S. Dionne
Represented By: Michael A. Garvin(Designation State / Local Government)
Represented By: Christine L. Hodzic(Designation State / Local Government)
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 ]
Movant: Neighbors of NLEC Inc.
Represented By: Elkin L. Kistner
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 ]
Movant: 1401 Locust Street LLC
Represented By: Elkin L. Kistner
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 ]
Movant: 1426 Washington Avenue LLC
Represented By: Elkin L. Kistner
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 ]
Movant: Brad Waldrop
Represented By: Elkin L. Kistner
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?