Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Durant v. ServiceMaster Co.

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided September 5, 2001No. Civ. 01-40007PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

GADOLA, District Judge.

Before the Court is Defendants’ motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) [docket entry 22], Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(e), the Court concludes that a hearing would not aid in the disposition of this motion. For the reasons set forth below, the Court will deny in part and grant in part Defendants’ motion.

I BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs filed their first amended complaint on May 21, 2001. Defendants are the ServiceMaster Company, TruGreen, Incorporated, and TruGreen Limited Partnership. Defendants are corporations that collaborate…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
  2. Carolyn Morgan v. Church's Fried ChickenCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1987
  3. Jackson Leeds v. Jonathan S. Meltz, Anthony Mansfield, Susan Ferraro, Merrick T. Rossein, Unknown John and Jane DoesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
  4. Mayer v. MylodCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1993
  5. Lydia Libertad v. Father Patrick WelchCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Gold v. Winget (In Re NM Holdings Co.)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · 2009
  2. QQC, INC. v. Hewlett-Packard Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2003
  3. In Re National Steel Corp.United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · 2004
  4. Convergent Group Corp. v. County of KentDistrict Court, W.D. Michigan · 2003
  5. German Free State of Bavaria v. Toyobo Co., Ltd.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 2007

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API