Legal Opinion
Armbruster v. KH CORPORATION
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided June 17, 2002No. 2:97-cv-75792PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
ROSEN, District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
The, above-captioned ERISA action is presently before the Court on Defendant K-H Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment. 1 Plaintiffs have responded to Defendant’s Motion to which response Defendant has replied. Supplemental briefs have also been filed by both parties. Having reviewed and considered the parties’ briefs and supporting documents and the Court’s entire record of this matter, the Court has determined that oral argument is not necessary. Therefore, pursuant to Eastern District…
2Cases cited57 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
- Sedima, S. P. R. L. v. Imrex Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,768 Phil A. Street and Clyde H. Street v. J.C. Bradford & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Pierce v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceDistrict Court, D. New Hampshire · 2004
- Brown v. Cassens Transport Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2005
- Moon v. Harrison Piping SupplyDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2005