Legal Opinion
Acme Printing Ink Co. v. Menard, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Decided June 29, 1995No. 89-C-834PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER
WARREN, District Judge.
Now before the Court are the motions for entry of final judgment filed by defendants Cambridge Chemical, Inc. (“Cambridge Chemical”), Cardinal Fabricating Corp. (“Cardinal”), Hartwig, Inc. (“Hartwig”), Hel-mut’s Building Supply Service, Inc. (“Hel-mut’s”), Robert Howell, Lincoln Savings Bank (“Lincoln Savings”), Service Painting Corp. (“Service Painting”), and Texaco, Inc. (“Texaco”) pursuant to Rules 54(b) and 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff Acme Printing Ink Co. (“Acme”) 1 opposes these motions and has asked the Court to…
2Cases cited23 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
- Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. General Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Gwaltney of Smithfield, Ltd. v. Chesapeake Bay Foundation, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Fayetteville Investors v. Commercial Builders, Incorporated American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1991
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- United States v. Duke Energy Corp.District Court, M.D. North Carolina · 2003
- Akzo Coatings, Inc. v. Ainger Corp.District Court, N.D. Indiana · 1995
- United States v. Power Engineering Co.District Court, D. Colorado · 1998
- Aurora National Bank v. Tri Star Marketing, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1998
- Interfaith Community Organization v. Alliedsignal, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1996
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.