Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,318 results
3.12s
Wieland v. United States Department of Health & Human Services
978 F. Supp. 2d 1008 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Oct 16, 2013
Allen v. … See Annex Med., Inc. v. Sebelius, 2013 WL 1276025 (8th Cir.2013) (unpublished); O’Brien v. U.S.
Cited 0 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · Oct 17, 2024
VALENTIN, ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. … .”); Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803 (8th Cir. 1986) (“A district court has the power under Fed. R. Civ.
Cited 0 timesUnknownWoody v. STERLING ALUMINUM PRODUCTS INCORPORATED
244 F. Supp. 84 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Jan 21, 1965
However, jurisdiction over these matters is committed in the first instance to the National Labor Relations Board and not to this Court. San Diego Building Trades Council et al. v. … See Rinker v. Local Union No. 24 of Amal. Lithographers, D.C., 201 F.Supp. 204 (1962), dismissed as then nonappealable 313 F.2d 956 . See also Tomko v. Hilbert, 3 Cir., 288 F.2d 625 (1961), Horn v.
Cited 11 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · Jul 25, 2024
See Brown v. Barnhart, 282 F.3d 580, 581 (8th Cir. 2002).
Cited 0 timesUnknownCincinnati Ins. Co. v. Meramec Valley Bank
259 F. Supp. 2d 922 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Feb 10, 2003
Watters, Brown and James, P.C., St. Louis, MO, for Plaintiff. Michael A. Campbell, Christopher J. Rausch, Llynn K. White, Polsinelli and Shalton, St. Louis, MO, Dennis E. O, Senior Partner, Bryan Cave LLP, St. … Wood v. Safeco Ins. Co. of Am., 980 S.W.2d 43, 48 (Mo.Ct.App.1998); Killian v. Tharp, 919 S.W.2d 19, 21 (Mo.Ct. App.1996).
Cited 1 timesPublishedAMERICAN RIVER TRANS. v. Paragon Marine Services
213 F. Supp. 2d 1035 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Apr 30, 2002
In exhibits 108, 109, 110 and 111, barges knocked out a fleet are shaded green, moored barges that stayed in the fleet are white, and the fleet barges are shaded brown. 33. … Question: Did you see anybody or any persons board the Valley Main Fleet and turn loose the ING 5565 Answer: No, sir, I did not. (Vol.
Cited 4 timesPublishedTaylor v. Caesars Entertainment Operating Company, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Missouri · Feb 16, 2024
See Miller v. … Fisher, 239 S.W.3d at 701; Pikey, 203 S.W.3d at 825; Brown, 856 S.W.2d at 56-57; Baugher v. Gates Rubber Co., Inc., 863 S.W.2d 905, 907- 14 (Mo.App.E.D, 1993).
Cited 0 timesUnknownBerry III v. 21st Circuit Court of the State of Missouri
District Court, E.D. Missouri · Nov 19, 2020
Granny Goose Foods, Inc. v. Bhd. of Teamsters, 415 U.S. 423, 439 (1974) (internal citation omitted). … Mazurek v. Armstrong, 520 U.S. 968, 972 (1997). Here, Berry has failed to carry the burden of persuasion.
Cited 0 timesUnknownTolden v. The City's Finest, LLC
District Court, E.D. Missouri · Apr 24, 2025
.”); Farraj v. Cunningham, 659 F. App’x 925, 927 (9th Cir. 2016) (mem.) (affirming the district court’s dismissal of plaintiff's complaint “based on his failure to oppose the motions to dismiss”); see also Brown v. … v. Fin. Stability Oversight Council, 865 F.3d 661, 667 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (explaining “our adversarial system relies on the arguments presented in the parties’ briefs”); cf Terrell v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownIndustrial Wire Products v. Teamsters Local Union
195 F. Supp. 2d 1150 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Mar 12, 2002
Hormel & Co. v. … Teamsters v. Industrial Wire, 186 F.3d at 882 .
Cited 0 timesPublishedGorsuch v. Formtek Metal Forming, Inc.
803 F. Supp. 2d 1016 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Mar 25, 2011
However, these employees held no stock in FMF, no ownership interest in FMF, no influence with the Board of Directors of FMF. … See, Helms v.
Cited 3 timesPublishedBartis v. John Bommarito Oldsmobile-Cadillac, Inc.
626 F. Supp. 2d 994 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Jun 4, 2009
See Saffels v. … See Brown v. L & P Indus., No. 5:04CV379JLH, 2005 WL 3503637 (E.D.Ark.
Cited 4 timesPublishedDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · Dec 1, 2020
Louis City resident, President of the Board of Aldermen.” … See Sorrell v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownKeys v. Presbyterian Children's Home and Services
District Court, E.D. Missouri · Jun 28, 2024
P. 41(b); see also Link v. Wabash R.R. … v.
Cited 0 timesUnknownSouthwestern Bell Telephone v. Missouri Public Service Commission
461 F. Supp. 2d 1055 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Sep 14, 2006
In Global NAPs, the Second Circuit was required to determine, inter alia, whether the Vermont Public Service Board "overstepped its authority in concluding that Board-determined calling areas govern whether traffic is subject … Global NAPs, Inc. v.
Cited 10 timesPublishedTwo Palms Software v. Worldwide Freight Management
780 F. Supp. 2d 916 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Feb 18, 2011
Michael Ward, Brown and James, P.C., Debbie S. Champion, Dean A. Stark, Rynearson and Suess, L.L.C., St. Louis, MO, for Defendants. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CAROL E. JACKSON, District Judge. … See Goldberg v.
Cited 5 timesPublishedJOSEPH MICHAEL DEVON ENGEL v. JEFFERSON COUNTY SHERIFF, DEPARTMENT, et al.
District Court, E.D. Missouri · Sep 11, 2026
MICHAEL DEVON ENGEL ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. … See Brown v. Rico Defendants Named & Unnamed, 2026 WL 1715966 at *1 (E.D. Mo. June 12, 2026) (construing a motion to reopen as a request for relief under Rule 60).
Cited 0 timesUnknownPhillips v. Unknown Chief Medical Officer
District Court, E.D. Missouri · Mar 20, 2024
P. 41(b); Brown v. Frey, 806 F.2d 801, 803-04 (8th Cir. 1986) (a district court has the power to dismiss an action for the plaintiff’s failure to comply with any court order).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · Sep 12, 2022
Barton v. Taber, 820 F.3d 958, 964 (8th Cir. 2016). See also Brown v. … Brown, 466 U.S. 147, 148 n. 1 (1984) (noting a rebuttable presumption that a claimant receives correspondence from an agency three days after it was mailed); but see, Barnes v. Riverside Seat Co., 46 Fed.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · Jun 13, 2024
Gilmore v. Armontrout, 861 F.2d 1061, 1065 (8th Cir. 1988). … Teter v. State, 893 S.W.2d 405 (Mo Ct. App. 1995) (quoting Wood v. State, 853 S.W.2d 369, 370 (Mo. Ct. App. 1993)). “The proper remedy” for claims challenging parole revocation “is habeas corpus.”
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna