Legal Opinion

Crihfield v. Monsanto Co.

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided February 11, 1994No. C-1-93-616PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION TO AMEND COMPLAINT AND DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS

SPIEGEL, District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on the Defendant Monsanto Company’s Motion to Dismiss (doc. 4), Defendant Harvey Hall’s Motion to Dismiss (doe. 8), the Plaintiffs’ Memoranda in Opposition to Defendant Monsanto Company’s Motion (doc. 11) and in Opposition to Defendant Hall’s Motion (doc. 12), Defendant Harold Hall’s Reply (doc. 13), Defendant, Monsanto Company’s Reply (doc. 14), the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Their Reply to Defendant…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  4. Byrd v. FaberOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  5. Paugh v. HanksOhio Supreme Court · 1983

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Griswold v. Fresenius USA, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1997
  2. Vandiver v. Morgan Adhesive CompanyOhio Court of Appeals · 1998
  3. Dodge v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2001
  4. Fisher v. Airgas USA, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio · 2023

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API