Legal Opinion
Shaw v. Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided December 21, 1989No. 86 Civ. 5244 (WCC)PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
WILLIAM C. CONNER, District Judge.
Defendants Rolex Watch U.S.A., Inc. and Rolex Industries, Inc. (collectively “defendants”) move for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(c). For the reasons articulated below, defendants’ motion is granted in part and denied in part.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Leslie Shaw commenced this action on June 30, 1986. Shaw alleged that defendants had unlawfully engaged in a conspiracy to obtain protection against the unauthorized importation of Rolex watches. Shaw claimed that defendants submitted fraudulent statements to United States…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- McNally v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Carpenter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- United States v. TurleySupreme Court of the United States · 1957
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Mylan Laboratories, Inc. v. Akzo, N.V.District Court, D. Maryland · 1991
- County of Suffolk v. Long Island Lighting Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- In re PaineWebber Ltd. Partnerships LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1997
- United States v. EisenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- United States v. EisenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.