M. et al v. City of St. Charles Public School District R-VI
Plaintiff: R. M., C. M. and W. M.
Defendant: City of St. Charles Public School District R-VI
Case Number: 4:2015cv00706
Filed: May 1, 2015
Court: US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office: St. Louis Office
County: St. Charles
Presiding Judge: Charles A. Shaw
Nature of Suit: Civil Rights: Education
Cause of Action: 20 U.S.C. ยง 1400
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
May 19, 2016 Opinion or Order Filing 49 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER -...IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant City of St. Charles Public School District RVIs motion to dismiss Counts I, II, III, IV, V, and VII of the Second Amended Complaint is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. In accor dance with this Memorandum and Order, the Motion is GRANTED to the extent that plaintiffs' claims under the Missouri Human Rights Act in Counts IV and V of their Second Amended Complaint are dismissed. In all other respects, the motion is DENI ED. [Doc. 32] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant City of St. Charles Public School District RVI's motion for leave to file a supplemental memorandum is DENIED. [Doc. 45] Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 5/19/2016. (MRC)
July 20, 2015 Opinion or Order Filing 26 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER -...IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Pleadings by Initials is GRANTED. [Doc. 2] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint is GRANTED. The Cl erk of the Court shall detach and docket the Second Amended Complaint, which was submitted as an attachment to the Motion for Leave. [Doc. 21] IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendant City of St. Charles Public School District RVI shall file its answer or response to the Second Amended Complaint within the time permitted by the Federal Rules. IT IS FURTHER ORDEREDthat defendant City of St. Charles Public School District RVIs Motion to Dismiss and Motion for Extension of Time to File Reply Memorandum in Support of its Motion to Dismiss are DENIED as moot. [Docs. 10 and 23]. Signed by District Judge Charles A. Shaw on 7/20/2015. (MRC)
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: M. et al v. City of St. Charles Public School District R-VI
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: R. M.
Represented By: Larry A. Bagsby
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: C. M.
Represented By: Larry A. Bagsby
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: W. M.
Represented By: Larry A. Bagsby
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: City of St. Charles Public School District R-VI
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?