Volpe v. Advance America, Cash Advance Centers of Missouri, Inc.

Justia Dockets & Filings Eighth Circuit Missouri Eastern District Volpe v. Advance America, Cash Advance Centers of Missouri, Inc.

Volpe v. Advance America, Cash Advance Centers of Missouri, Inc.

Plaintiff:	Carolina Volpe
Defendant:	Advance America, Cash Advance Centers of Missouri, Inc.
Case Number:	4:2015cv01119
Filed:	July 20, 2015
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri
Office:	St. Louis Office
County:	St. Louis - County
Presiding Judge:	John M. Bodenhausen
Nature of Suit:	Other Contract
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1332
Jury Demanded By:	Plaintiff

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed	Document Text
September 1, 2015	Filing 21 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs Second Motion for Leave to Substitute Plaintiffs Memorandum In Opposition of Defendants Motion to Stay Litigation and Compel Individual Arbitration (ECF No. 17 ) is GRANTED; IT IS FURTHE R ORDERED that Defendants Request to File an Amended Reply is DENIED as moot; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Stay Litigation and Compel Individual Arbitration (ECF No. 8 ) is GRANTED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED pursuant to 9 U.S.C. &# 167; 4, that the parties proceed to arbitration in accordance with the Loan Agreement; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall jointly submit a notice updating the Court on the status of this case no later than ten (10) days following the completion of arbitration. Signed by Magistrate Judge John M. Bodenhausen on 9/1/15. (JAB)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 1, 2015

Filing 21 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs Second Motion for Leave to Substitute Plaintiffs Memorandum In Opposition of Defendants Motion to Stay Litigation and Compel Individual Arbitration (ECF No. 17 ) is GRANTED; IT IS FURTHE R ORDERED that Defendants Request to File an Amended Reply is DENIED as moot; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants Motion to Stay Litigation and Compel Individual Arbitration (ECF No. 8 ) is GRANTED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED pursuant to 9 U.S.C. &# 167; 4, that the parties proceed to arbitration in accordance with the Loan Agreement; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall jointly submit a notice updating the Court on the status of this case no later than ten (10) days following the completion of arbitration. Signed by Magistrate Judge John M. Bodenhausen on 9/1/15. (JAB)

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: Volpe v. Advance America, Cash Advance Centers of Missouri, Inc.
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Plaintiff: Carolina Volpe
Represented By:	Gregory Michael Klote
Represented By:	R. Tyson Mutrux
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: Advance America, Cash Advance Centers of Missouri, Inc.
Represented By:	John R. Munich
Represented By:	Joy Syrcle
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?