Legal Opinion
Justin Gadberry v. Jalesia Franklina McQueen Kuenzel and Anthony Aloysius Kuenzel, III
District Court, E.D. Missouri
Decided November 19, 2025No. 4:23-cv-01311Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION JUSTIN GADBERRY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No. 4:23CV1311 HEA ) JALESIA FRANKLINA McQUEEN KUENZEL ) and ANTHONY ALOYSIUS KUENZEL, III ) ) Defendants. ) OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Second Motion to Dismiss, [Doc. No 34]. Plaintiff has not responded to the Motion. Pursuant to the Court's Local Rules, Plaintiff's failure to file a response can be construed as a concession of the motion. See Local Rule 4.01. McIntosh v. Ameren UE, No. 4:09CV1461 HEA, 2009 WL 3754158, at *1 (E.D.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. FeldmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Ankenbrandt Ex Rel. L. R. v. RichardsSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.