Legal Opinion
Cambridge Electronics Corp. v. MGA Electronics, Inc.
District Court, C.D. California
Decided June 22, 2004No. CV 02-8636MMM(PJWX)PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
MORROW, District Judge.
Plaintiff commenced this contract action on November 11, 2002, naming MGA Electronics, Inc., and Roger T. Featherston as defendants. After MGA filed for bankruptcy, the court granted plaintiff leave to file an amended complaint that asserted claims against Roger A. Featherston, MGA Midwest, LLC, RTF Associates, LLC, and Chandler Lake Elizabeth Development Group, LLC. All of the defendants have now moved for summary judgment on the claims stated against them in plaintiffs first amended complaint.1
I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND2
2Cases cited77 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- T.W. Electrical Service, Inc. v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
- Robin Orr v. Bank of America, Nt & SaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- Cel-Tech Communications, Inc. v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Co.California Supreme Court · 1999
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- In re Sulfuric Acid Antitrust LitigationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2005
- D'Elia v. Rice Development, Inc.Court of Appeals of Utah · 2006
- Tamko Roofing Products, Inc. v. Smith Engineering Company Smith Environmental Corporation Kenneth C. Dargatz Haden Schweitzer CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2006
- United States ex rel. Englund v. Los Angeles CountyDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2006
- Mullins v. Prudential InsuranceDistrict Court, W.D. Kentucky · 2010
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.