Legal Opinion
United States v. Advance MacHine Co.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided August 6, 1982No. Civ. 3-82-152PublishedCited by 36 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
RENNER, District Judge.
Before the Court is defendant’s motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. The motion was submitted on briefs.
In support of its motion, defendant advances four grounds: (1) The action is barred by the five-year statute of limitations, 28 U.S.C. § 2462; (2) the action is further barred by res judicata and the rule against splitting a cause of action; (3) defendant has never been a manufacturer of baseball pitching machines, and, therefore, cannot be charged with a violation of the Consumer Product Safety Act [“CPSA”], 15 U.S.C. §…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Commissioner v. SunnenSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Tcherepnin v. KnightSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Taylor v. Standard Gas & Electric Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1939
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by36 opinions
- Robert's Hawaii School Bus, Inc. v. Laupahoehoe Transportation Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1999
- United States v. Athlone Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1984
- United States v. Robert E. MeyerCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1987
- Salt Lake City Corp. v. James Constructors, Inc.Court of Appeals of Utah · 1988
- United States v. Core Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1985
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.