Legal Opinion

Nash v. Matanuska Susitna Borough

District Court, D. Alaska

Decided April 19, 2022No. 3:19-cv-00235Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ALASKA CHARLES E. NASH, Plaintiff, Case No. 3:19-cv-00235-JMK vs. ORDER GRANTING MATANUSKA-SUSITNA DEFENDANT’S MOTION BOROUGH, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendant. Before the Court at Docket 36 is Defendant Matanuska-Susitna Borough’s (“the Borough”) Motion for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff Charles Nash responded at Docket 41, to which the Borough replied at Docket 40. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED. I. BACKGROUND This dispute stems from a 1998 timber sale contract between the Borough and Mr. Nash. On September…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. T.W. Electrical Service, Inc. v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Ass'nCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
  4. Soremekun v. Thrifty Payless, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
  5. Keenan v. AllanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996

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

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

Powered by the Exa API