Legal Opinion
Fulgham v. Daniel J. Keating Co.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided September 29, 2003No. Civil Action 01-0111(SSB)PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BROTMAN, District Judge.
Presently before this Court are motions by Defendants Turner Construction Company, Daniel J. Keating Company and Super Sky Products, Inc. for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56 and a motion by Third-Party Defendant Mountain Pacific, L.L.C. to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), or in the alternative for summary judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56.
I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
This case arises from the personal injury of an employee of…
2Cases cited45 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
- Alvaro Quiroga v. Hasbro, Inc. And Playskool Baby, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
- Albert L. Lawrence v. National Westminster Bank New Jersey, Albert LawrenceCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1996
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Maxim Crane Works, L.P. v. Tilbury ConstructorsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012