Kathryn Gillette v. Gaming Entertainment, et al
Filed Nonprecedential Disposition PER CURIAM. DISMISSED. Diane P. Wood, Chief Judge; Richard A. Posner, Circuit Judge and David F. Hamilton, Circuit Judge. [6841400-1]  [16-3662]
To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted * February 21, 2017
Decided May 16, 2017
DIANE P. WOOD, Chief Judge
RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge
DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge
KATHRYN J. GILLETTE,
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Southern District
of Indiana, Indianapolis Division.
(INDIANA) d/b/a RISING STAR
CASINO, et al.,
Sarah Evans Barker,
Kathryn Gillette defaulted on loans from eight casinos. She then sued the casinos,
alleging violations of various consumer-protection laws. The district court dismissed
Gillette’s claims, and she appeals.
We have agreed to decide the case without oral argument because the briefs and
record adequately present the facts and legal arguments, and oral argument would not
significantly aid the court. See FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).
We ordered the parties to submit supplemental briefs addressing the
participation in bankruptcy of appellee RDI Caesars Riverboat Casino. After reviewing
the supplemental briefs, this court has determined that the district court’s judgment of
September 14, 2016, is nonfinal due to the bankruptcy of appellee RDI Caesars
Riverboat Casino. See 11 U.S.C. § 362; Maritime Elec. Co., Inc. v. United Jersey Bank, 959
F.2d 1194, 1203–09 (3d Cir. 1991). This court therefore lacks jurisdiction over the appeal
because the district court has not disposed of all claims by all parties. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
54(b); see also id.; see also Tradesman Int’l, Inc. v. Black, 724 F.3d 1004, 1006–07 (7th Cir.
2013). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the appeal is DISMISSED for lack of appellate
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?