Allen v. Reachout Healthcare Amercia
Plaintiff: Michelle N. Allen
Defendant: Reachout Healthcare Amercia
Case Number: 4:2011cv01256
Filed: July 15, 2011
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - County
Presiding Judge: Nannette A Baker
Nature of Suit: Employment
Cause of Action: 42:2000
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
December 29, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 16 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER - IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, in light of the Court's Order dated October 4, 2011, granting Plaintiff's motion to consolidate the above two captioned cases, that Plaintiff shall, on or before January 13, 2012, file an Amended Complaint, that includes all claims against Defendant Nevin Waters, D.D.S., PC, and Defendant Reachout Healthcare America. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to dismiss (Doc. No. 9) filed by Defendant Reachout Healthcare America in Case No. 4:10CV01256 AGF is DENIED asmoot, without prejudice to the refiling by this Defendant of a motion to dismiss addressed to the Amended Complaint to be filed by Plaintiff. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for the appo intment of counsel in Case No. 4:10CV01256 AGF (Doc. No. 4) and her motion for appointment of counsel in Case No. 4:10CV01255 AGF (Doc. No. 24) are DENIED for the same reasons set forth in the Court's Order dated October 18, 2011 (Doc. No. 18) i n Case No. 4:10CV01255 AGF. The pleadings filed to date by Plaintiff convince the Court that she is capable of filing an Amended Complaint as directed above, as well as of preparing for the Scheduling Conference set for January 27, 2012. Plaintiff&# 039;s assertion that she believes the contingency fee requested by an attorney is too high is not a basis for the Court to appoint an attorney to represent her. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk's Office shall close Case No. 4:10CV01256 AGF.. Signed by Honorable Audrey G. Fleissig on 12/29/2011. (MRC)
August 23, 2011 Opinion or Order Filing 6 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk receive and file the complaint in this action without payment of the required filing fee. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall issue process or cause process to be issued upon the complaint as to Reachout Healthcare America. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as to Daniel Morrisey, the Clerk shall not issue process or cause process to be issued, because the complaint is legally frivolous and fails to state a claim or cause of action. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk shall docket this case as Michelle N. Allen v. Reachout Healthcare America. A separate Order of Partial Dismissal shall accompany this Memorandum and Order. Signed by Honorable Audrey G. Fleissig on 8/23/2011. (NCL)
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: Allen v. Reachout Healthcare Amercia
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Reachout Healthcare Amercia
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: Michelle N. Allen
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?