Scottrade, Inc. v. Variant Holdings, LLC et al
Plaintiff: Scottrade, Inc.
Defendant: Variant Holdings, LLC, Variant, Inc. and Stephen C. Wren
Case Number: 4:2013cv01710
Filed: August 30, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - County
Presiding Judge: Henry E. Autrey
Nature of Suit: Other Contract
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332
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
August 7, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 121 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER... IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 106 ) is DENIED. Signed by District Judge Ronnie L. White on 8/7/2015. (NEB)
July 30, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 117 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Amended Complaint, or in the Alternative, to Compel Arbitration (ECF No. 94 ) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, consistent with this Memorandum and Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs claims for Constructive Trust (Count IV) and Action to Enforce Arbitration Award (Count V) are DISMISSED. Signed by District Judge Ronnie L. White on June 30, 2015. (BRP)
October 30, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 88 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff Scottrade, Inc.'s Second Motion to Compel (ECF No. 63 ) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff Scottrade, Inc's Motion for Sanctions for Defendants' Failure to Comp ly with this Courts Order of May 15, 2014 (ECF No. 65 ) is DENIED. IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File its First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 64 ) is GRANTED. The Clerk of the Court shall file Exhibit A attached to Plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 64-1) as Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. Signed by District Judge Ronnie L. White on October 30, 2014. (BRP)
January 31, 2014 Opinion or Order Filing 41 OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 17 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Dismiss or to Compel Arbitration, [Doc. No. 17], is DENIED in toto. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Autrey on 1/31/14. (CLA)
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: Scottrade, Inc. v. Variant Holdings, LLC et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: Scottrade, Inc.
Represented By: John S. Kingston
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: Variant Holdings, LLC
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: Variant, 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 ]
Defendant: Stephen C. Wren
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?