Robinson et al. v. Rendlen, III et al.
Respondent: Charles E. Rendlen, III
Debtor: Latoya L. Steward
Case Number: 4:2013cv02214
Filed: November 1, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Louis - City
Presiding Judge: Stephen N. Limbaugh
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1651
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 10, 2013 Opinion or Order Filing 3 MEMORANDUM OPINION: Because this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the petition for writ of mandamus, this matter will be dismissed. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 12/10/13. (CSG)
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: Robinson et al. v. Rendlen, III et al.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Debtor: Latoya L. Steward
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 ]
Respondent: Charles E. Rendlen, III
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?