Legal Opinion
Vales v. Preciado
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided August 9, 2011No. Civil Action No. DKC 05-3110PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
DEBORAH K. CHASANOW, District Judge.
Presently pending and ready for resolution are two motions filed by Plaintiffs/Counterdefendants Roger and Lourdes Vales: a motion for summary on DefendanVCounterplaintiff Alma Preciado’s counterclaims (ECF No. 244) and a partial motion for summary judgment on the Valeses’ claims against Defendants (ECF No. 245). The court now rules pursuant to Local Rule 105.6, no hearing being deemed necessary. For the reasons that follow, the motion for summary judgment on Preciados’ counterclaim will be granted, while the partial motion for summary…
2Cases cited25 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
- Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Robert Louis Roseboro v. Sam P. Garrison, Individually and in His Official Capacity as Warden of Central PrisonCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1975
- Commissioner v. SunnenSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Butler v. WindsorDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2015
- Daquan Tirell Boone v. Endoscopy Center of Bel AirDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2026
- Fuller v. Trans Union, LLCDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2023
- G&G Closed Circuit Events, LLC v. VillalobosDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2025
- Thay Smith v. Absolute Resolution Investments, LLCDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2026
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.