Legal Opinion
Graham v. City of Oklahoma City
District Court, W.D. Oklahoma
Decided February 3, 1986No. Civ 84-1756-RPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
DAVID L. RUSSELL, District Judge.
The Plaintiff has brought this action seeking redress for alleged deprivation of his liberty and property interests. Defendants City of Oklahoma City and Lloyd A. Gramling have filed a Motion for Summary Judgment pursuant to Rule 56, Fed.R. Civ.P. The motion has been fully briefed, and the Court is now ready to dispose of it.1
The approach of movants is somewhat unique. This motion is denominated as one for summary judgment, and rightly so due to attachments of evidentiary material outside the pleading. However, there is no concise statement of undisputed…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Codd v. VelgerSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Miller v. City Of MissionCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1983
- Bailey v. KirkCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985
- Vinyard v. KingCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1984
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Graham v. City of Oklahoma CityCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988
- Graham v. City Of Oklahoma CityCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1988