Legal Opinion
Riggan v. Midland Independent School District
District Court, W.D. Texas
Decided February 23, 2000No. 2:99-cv-00066PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
FURGESON, District Judge.
Before the Court are Defendants’ .Motion for Summary Judgment and Brief in Support, filed September 30, 1999; Plaintiffs Response to Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, filed October 25, 1999; and Defendants’ Reply to Plaintiffs Response, filed November 1, 1999. After due consideration of the motions, briefs, record, and controlling law, the Court is of the opinion that the Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment should be GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.
ISSUES PRESENTED
Th…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Goss v. LopezSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Siegert v. GilleySupreme Court of the United States · 1991
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Patrick v. Success Acad. Charter Sch., Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2018
- Thompson v. Exxon Mobil Corp.District Court, E.D. Texas · 2004
- Marner Ex Rel. Marner v. Eufaula City School BoardDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama · 2002
- Bennett v. Calabrian Chemicals Corp.District Court, E.D. Texas · 2004
- J.K. ex rel. Kaplan v. Minneapolis Public SchoolsDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2011
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.