Travelers Property Casualty Company of America v. Nomax, Inc. et al, No. 4:2015cv00990 - Document 76 (E.D. Mo. 2017)

Court Description: OPINION MEMORANDUM AND ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties show cause within 10 days from the date of this order this action should not be dismissed as moot. Response to Court due by 4/22/2017. Signed by District Judge Henry Edward Autrey on 4/12/17. (CLA)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY COMPANY OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. NOMAX, INC., ST. LOUIS HEART CENTER, INC., and JOHN DOES 1-10 Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 4:15CV990 HEA OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on its own Motion. This case stems from Case Number 4:15-CV-517 RLW, where St. Louis Heart Center, Inc. is the plaintiff and Nomax, Inc. is the defendant. The instant case centers on whether Plaintiff must defend its client, Nomax, in Case No. 4:15-CV-517 RLW. On March 20, 2007, the Honorable Ronnie L. White granted Nomax’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing and dismissed case number 4:15-CV-517 RLW. Citing Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S.Ct. 1540, 1544 (2016), the Court found that St. Louis Heart Center, Inc., did not “allege[] a concrete and particularized injury arising from the alleged deficiency in the opt-out notice,” because St. Louis Heart Center requested and received faxes from Nomax. The Court determined that St. Louis Heart Center had “not suffered a concrete injury and lacks standing,” under Article III of the United States Constitution. As such, the parties shall show cause, within 10 days from the date of this order, why this action should not be dismissed as moot. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the parties show cause within 10 days from the date of this order this action should not be dismissed as moot. Dates this 12th day of April, 2017. _____________________________________ HENRY EDWARD AUTREY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.