Legal Opinion

Fay v. Teamsters Local Union No. 553

District Court, E.D. New York

Decided March 4, 1999No. CV 97-0692(DRH)Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

HURLEY, District Judge.

Pending before the Court are the motions of (1) Defendants Teamsters Local Union No. 553, IBT, AFL—CIO (“Local 553”), William Ness, President of Local 553 and Bernard Pelligrino, Secretary-Treasurer of Local 553 (collectively the “Union Defendants”) and (2) Defendants Petro, Inc., (“Petro”) Reliance Utilities, Inc. (“Reliance”) and Reliance Associates Corp. (“RAC”) (collectively the “Employer Defendants”) for summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ claims, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 56(b). For the reasons that follow, the motions…

2Cases cited29 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. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
  5. Vaca v. SipesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967

24 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