Nakao v. Rushen
District Court, N.D. California
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
WEIGEL, District Judge.
This case comes before the Court on the motion of plaintiffs Charles Bruce Nakao and Helen Gabriel Nakao for partial summary judgment and the cross-motion of defendant J.P. Campbell for summary judgment.
The outlines of the case have already been discussed in some detail in connection with a prior motion. See Nakao v. Rushen (Nakao I), 542 F.Supp. 856 (N.D.Cal.1982). The following facts pertinent to the present motion are not in dispute. In…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- British Airways Board, 1 v. The Boeing CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1978
- United States v. Leigh Raymond TamuraCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- John H. Gordon v. Jack Watson, III and George CanslerCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Jaxon v. Circle K Corp.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985
- Nakao v. RushenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- Nakao v. RushenDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1986
- Nakao v. RushenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1985
- 39 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1260, 38 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 35,708 Gilbert Jaxon, and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Circle K Corporation, James S. Coolige, Robert G. Campau, Daniel Gomez, Clyde Petty, Joe Wilson, Kenneth Moffett, Eeoc District Director, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Eeoc Area Director, Phoenix, Arizona, and Eeoc Specialist Ralph GarciaCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1985