Prior to the events that gave rise to this dispute, Myers had come into repeated contact with Casino Queen. In 2008, Casino Queen donated $150,000 to a group that opposed the repeal of gambling loss limit laws in Missouri. In addition to licensing agreements and transportation, Casino Queen donates to political efforts in Missouri. Louis Cardinals, and pays for a special area located inside the stadium known as the “Casino Queen Party Porch.” To facilitate movement of customers between Missouri and Illinois, Casino Queen operates a fleet of shuttle buses that ferry customers to and from Busch Stadium. Specifically, Casino Queen advertises at Busch Stadium, home of the St. Casino Queen maintains business relationships with professional sports teams in Missouri.

Not only does Casino Queen advertise through print, radio, and television media in Missouri, but it also engages in direct mailing campaigns targeted at Missouri addresses. As such, Casino Queen actively pursues marketing campaigns directed at Missouri residents for the purpose of attracting customers to patronize the casino and hotel.Ĭasino Queen's advertising and promotional campaigns are numerous and extensive. Louis, Missouri, and several smaller suburbs in both Missouri and Illinois.

Casino Queen's location places it within a larger metropolitan area that is comprised of East St. IĬasino Queen operates a gambling and hotel establishment in East St. Following removal, Casino Queen filed a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, arguing Missouri's long-arm statute did not authorize jurisdiction and the exercise of jurisdiction overĬasino Queen by a Missouri court would not comport with due process requirements. The action was removed to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. in Missouri state court based on theories of negligence and premises liability. Nester, on the brief, Belleville, IL, for appellee.īefore BYE, BEAM, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Kayira, argued and on the brief, Clayton, MO, for appellant.

Casino queen inc case analysis