Legal Opinion
Adickes v. SH Kress & Company
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 26, 1966PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BONSAL, District Judge.
Defendant, S. H. Kress & Company (Kress), moves for summary judgment pursuant to Rules 12 and 56, F.R.Civ.P. Plaintiff cross moves for an order granting leave to plaintiff to amend her complaint pursuant to Rule 15, F.R.Civ.P.
On November 12, 1964, plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages under Title 42 U.S.C. § 1983. * Her complaint alleges that defendant, acting both under color of state law (Count I) and in conspiracy with the Chief of Police of Hattiesburg, Mississippi, and his agents (Count II), denied plaintiff service at defendant’s lunch counter in…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Monroe v. PapeSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Shelley v. KraemerSupreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Civil Rights CasesSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United Steelworkers of America v. Phelps Dodge Corporation, a New York Corporation, DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Frank R. Annunziato v. The Gan, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
- Warren v. CummingsDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 1969
- Harold H. LANGFORD Et Al., Appellants, v. CITY OF TEXARKANA, ARKANSAS, Et Al., AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1973
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.