Legal Opinion

Anderson v. Procopy Technologies, Inc.

District Court, S.D. Ohio

Decided May 29, 2014No. Case No. 1:11-cv-912-HJWPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

HERMAN J. WEBER, Senior District Judge.

Pending is the defendant’s “Motion for Summary Judgment” (doc. no. 22), which plaintiff opposes. Defendant has submitted proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law, which plaintiff has highlighted as true, false, or irrelevant (doc. no. 34). The Court held a hearing on May 14, 2014, at which counsel presented oral arguments. Having carefully considered the record, including the parties’ briefs, exhibits, proposed findings, oral arguments, and applicable authority, the Court will grant the motion for the following reasons:

I. Background and…

2Cases cited39 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. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 2007

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Amy Wright, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. TrueCare Property Holdings, LLCDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2025
  2. George Besada v. ECS Southeast, LLPDistrict Court, M.D. Tennessee · 2025
  3. Holt v. Community Action Council for Lexington-Fayette, Bourbon, Harrison, and Nicholas Counties, INC.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2024
  4. Randolph v. Bath & Body Works, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2025
  5. Spice Jazz LLC v. Youngevity International, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 2020

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

Powered by the Exa API