Legal Opinion
Mateo v. M/S KISO
District Court, N.D. California
Decided November 19, 1991No. C-90-2357 DLJPublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
JENSEN, District Judge.
The present motions came on for hearing before this Court on June 14, 1991. Richard Dodson appeared for plaintiffs. Frederick Wentker appeared for defendants. For the reasons set out below, plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is DENIED, subject to the terms of this Order. Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification is DENIED. Defendants’ motion for dismissal of plaintiffs’ class allegations without leave to amend is GRANTED. Defendants’ motion to strike paragraph 15 of the complaint 1…
2Cases cited71 opinions
- 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
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Sosna v. IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
66 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- McCoy v. MacOn Water AuthorityDistrict Court, M.D. Georgia · 1997
- In re Conagra Foods, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2015
- Mazur v. Ebay Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2009
- Parker v. ArteryWyoming Supreme Court · 1995
- Davis v. LehaneDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 2000
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.