COYNE v. FOUR LEAF CLOVER INVESTMENTS, LLC

Case No. 4:16 CV 1937 CDP.

PATRICK COYNE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. FOUR LEAF CLOVER INVESTMENTS, LLC, et al., Defendants.

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division.

Editors Note
Applicable Law: 29 U.S.C. § 206
Cause: 29 U.S.C. § 206 Collect Unpaid Wages
Nature of Suit: 710 Labor: Fair Standards
Source: PACER


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Patrick Coyne, Plaintiff, represented by Mark A. Potashnick , WEINHAUS AND POTASHNICK.

Patrick Coyne, Plaintiff, represented by Michael N. Litrownik , OUTTEN AND GOLDEN LLP.

Four Leaf Clover Investments, LLC, Defendant, represented by Bryan M. Kaemmerer , MCCARTHY AND LEONARD & Michael E. Kaemmerer , MCCARTHY AND LEONARD.

Stephen E Saladin, Defendant, represented by Bryan M. Kaemmerer , MCCARTHY AND LEONARD & Michael E. Kaemmerer , MCCARTHY AND LEONARD.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CATHERINE D. PERRY, District Judge.

Upon review of plaintiff Patrick Coyne's Motion for Equitable Tolling of the Statute of Limitations and defendants' response to the motion, I agree with defendants that to rule the merits of the motion would be to render an advisory opinion on a question that is not ripe for adjudication. I will therefore deny the motion, but without prejudice to be refiled if and when the circumstances of this case require consideration of the issue raised. Further, given the status of the proceedings in the related case now pending in the Northern District of Illinois and in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, and the parties' agreement that the case before me be administratively closed pending the outcome of those proceedings, I will administratively close this case and remove it from the active docket. Any motion seeking reopening of the case shall state:

(a) the facts and procedural history, including any significant occurrences in the N.D. Illinois and Seventh Circuit proceedings; (b) the issues remaining for determination by this Court; (c) the potential for settlement, and the status of any settlement discussions; (d) whether a Rule 16 scheduling conference is requested; (e) the status of discovery; (f) whether significant pretrial motion practice, including the filing of potentially dispositive motions, is anticipated; (g) the date by which it is reasonably likely that the case would be ready to proceed to trial; and (h) the estimated length of trial. Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff Patrick Coyne's Motion for Equitable Tolling of the Statute of Limitations [14] is denied without prejudice.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall administratively close this action, subject to reopening on a motion filed in compliance with this Order.


Comment

1000 Characters Remaining

Leagle.com reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases