Ensley, Inc. v. United States
United States Court of Federal Claims
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BUSH, Senior Judge.
Now pending before the court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56 of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal Claims (RCFC). Defendant’s motion has been fully briefed and is ripe for a decision by the court. Oral argument was neither requested by the parties nor required by the court. For the reasons set forth below, the court grants defendant’s motion.
BACKGROUND 1
I. Factual Background
A. Lawrence Magdovitz and Ensley Station
During the time period relevant to this litigation, Lawrence Magdovitz, an attorney, realtor, and residential…
2Cases cited30 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Commissioner, Immigration & Naturalization Service v. JeanSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Citizens Bank of Md. v. StrumpfSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Agility Public Warehousing Company, K.S.C.P. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2019
- e at Seventeenth Avenue Owners Association v. NelsonColorado Court of Appeals · 2021