Legal Opinion
R. Renaissance, Inc. v. Rohm and Haas Co.
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided January 26, 1987No. Civ. C-1-81-777PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
DAVID S. PORTER, Senior District Judge.
I
Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure sets forth the standard for summary judgment. Under Rule 56(c), summary judgment is proper “if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” In Celotex v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986), the Supreme Court held that this rule mandates an entry of summary…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Merit Motors, Inc. v. Chrysler CorporationCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1977
- Drayton v. Jiffee Chemical Corp.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1978
- Patricia Bach, Etc. v. Penn Central Transportation Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1974
- Au Rustproofing Center, Inc., Cross-Appellee v. Gulf Oil Corporation, Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1985
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Arcadian Phosphates, Inc., Judas Azuelos, and Eli Sivan v. Arcadian CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- McCarthy, Lebit, Crystal & Haiman Co. v. First Union Management, Inc.Ohio Court of Appeals · 1993
- Columbus Trade Exchange, Inc. v. AMCA International Corp.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1991
- Cyberchron Corp. v. Calldata Systems Development, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1993
- Dallum v. Farmers Union Central Exchange, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1990
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.