Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Gladys Banks v. Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided October 20, 1986No. 84-5830Published

1ConcurrenceBuckley, Circuit Judge

For the reasons stated in Section III of the majority opinion, I agree that summary judgment was properly entered against appellant Gladys Banks because she failed to support her opposition to appellee’s motion for summary judgment with evidence sufficient to create a contested issue of fact. I cannot agree, however, with the reasoning in Section II of the majority opinion.

As an initial matter, I believe that the majority’s conclusion that Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 105 S.Ct. 1938, 85 L.Ed.2d 1254 (1985), requires us to borrow the District of Columbia’s three-year catchall statute of…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  2. Daniels v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Wilson v. GarciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Johnson v. Railway Express Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1975
  5. Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945

28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API