Legal Opinion

Becton Dickinson and Co. v. Wolckenhauer

District Court, D. New Jersey

Decided October 28, 1998No. CIV.A.95-1084(NHP)PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

POLITAN, District Judge.

Dear Counsel:

This matter comes before the Court on cross-motions for summary judgment on Count Eleven of Becton Dickinson & Company’s Amended Complaint, which asserts, in substance, a wrongful levy action against the United States pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7426. The Court has decided the motions without oral argument, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 78. For the reasons explained below, plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is DENIED, the Government’s cross-motion is GRANTED, Counts Eleven and Twelve are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 1

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

While…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Irwin v. Department of Veterans AffairsSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  4. Library of Congress v. ShawSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. Groman v. Township Of ManalapanCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1995

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Brewer v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · 2005

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

Powered by the Exa API