Legal Opinion

Enguita v. Neoplan USA Corp.

District Court, S.D. Texas

Decided July 7, 2005No. Civ.A. B-04-121PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

TAGLE, District Judge.

BE IT REMEMBERED that on July 7, 2005, the Court GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART defendant Neoplan USA Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment. Dkt. No. 19.

I. Introduction

Daniel Enguita (“plaintiff’), a native of Spain and Texas domiciliary, was employed by the Neoplan USA Corporation (“defendant”), a Colorado corporation. In 2002, after approximately thirty-seven years of service, the defendant terminated the plaintiffs employment.

On June 21, 2004, the plaintiff sued the defendant in the 197th District Court of Cameron County, Texas. Dkt. No. 1…

2Cases cited37 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. Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Delaware State College v. RicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  5. Schroeder v. Texas Iron Works, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1991

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Lueck v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2010
  2. Dortch v. Memorial Herman Healthcare System-SouthwestDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2007
  3. Bradley v. Phillips Petroleum Co.District Court, S.D. Texas · 2007
  4. George Lueck v. State of Texas and Texas Department of Transportation, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2010
  5. George Lueck v. State of Texas and Texas Department of Transportation, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2010

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

Powered by the Exa API