Legal Opinion
Lexington Insurance v. Rugg & Knopp, Inc.
District Court, E.D. Wisconsin
Decided March 31, 1998No. 96-C-126PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE, DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, GRANTING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, ENTERING DECLARATORY JUDGMENT THAT PLAINTIFF MAY NOT DENY COVERAGE ON THE GROUND THAT PLAINTIFF WAS NOT GIVEN TIMELY NOTICE AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF’S DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACTION
CLEVERT, District Judge.
A disti'ict court must review de novo the recommendations of a magistrate judge to which either party timely objects. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); United States v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667, 673-76, 100 S.Ct. 2406, 65 L.Ed.2d 424 (1980). The…
2Cases cited22 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Thomas v. ArnSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Clementi v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2001
- Ruppel v. RamseyerDistrict Court, C.D. Illinois · 1999
- Rodrigues v. Alliant Credit UnionDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2022