ameristar casino chicago win loss statement

Facts Ameristar operates an entertainment facility that includes a casino, restaurants, and a hotel. All facts and reasonable inferences are construed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 839 F.3d 583, 591 (7th Cir. “To survive summary judgment, the nonmoving party must show evidence sufficient to establish every element that is essential to its claim and for which it will bear the burden of proof at trial.” Diedrich v. The movant bears the burden of establishing that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact. A genuine dispute as to a material fact exists if “the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party.” Anderson v. Legal Standards Summary judgment is appropriate if the movant shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The motion is granted in part, denied in part. Ameristar and Lisa Jung, a former Ameristar regular customer, claim that Local 1’s actions violate the National Labor Relations Act’s prohibition on coercive secondary labor activity. Local 1 tried to get regular customers of Ameristar’s casinos to join a consumer boycott of Ameristar and broadcasted-through leaflets, mailings, banners, and in-person contact-the fact that particular customers had not joined the boycott. MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiff Ameristar Casino East Chicago, LLC is in a labor dispute with defendant UNITE HERE Local 1, a labor organization that represents some of Ameristar’s employees.

58 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION AMERISTAR CASINO EAST CHICAGO, LLC and LISA JUNG, Plaintiffs, No.

Ameristar Casino East Chicago LLC et al v.

Ameristar casino chicago win loss statement