Freidman v. General Motors Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
SHIRA A. SCHEINDLIN, District Judge:
I. INTRODUCTION
Plaintiffs, a group of taxi companies and the individual owners of handicap-accessible taxicab medallions permitting the operation of handicap-accessible taxicabs in New York City (collectively, the “Taxi Companies”), brought the instant diversity action 1 against Areola Sales & Service Corporation (“Areola” or “defendant”), the last remaining defendant. 2 Areola now moves for summary judgment seeking to dismiss plaintiffs’ remaining breach of contract claim. 3 For the following reasons, Areola’s motion for summary judgment…
2Cases cited27 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
- McCarthy v. Dun & Bradstreet Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2007
- Roe v. City of WaterburyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Noel v. New York City Taxi & Limousine CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2012
- House of Diamonds v. BORGIONI, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2010
- Roberts v. Weight Watchers International, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2016
- Tomra of North America, Inc. v. Count & Crush, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2023