Belkin v. Casino One Corporation et al
| Aaron Belkin |
| Casino One Corporation, Missouri State Highway Patrol, Todd Barthelmass and Ricky Rorie |
| 4:2014cv00452 |
| March 11, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri |
| St. Louis Office |
| St. Louis - City |
| E. Richard Webber |
| Other Civil Rights |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1332 |
| Both |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
107
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER (See Full Order) IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Todd Barthelmass's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 80 ] is GRANTED. Count IV against Defendant Todd Barthelmass is DISMISSED, with prejudice. Count VI against Def endant Todd Barthelmass is DISMISSED, with prejudice. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant Casino One Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF No. 83 ] is GRANTED. Count IV against Defendant Casino One Corporation is DISMISSED, with prejudice. Defendant Casino One is hereby dismissed from this matter. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on 3/15/16. (EAB)
|
|
Filing
39
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Missouri State Highway Patrol's Motion to Dismiss Count VI [ECF No. 26 ] is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, as to MSHP, Count VI of the Complaint shall be DISMISSED, without prejudice. Signed by District Judge E. Richard Webber on May 1, 2014. (BRP)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
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.
