Southern Maryland Agricultural Ass'n v. United States
District Court, D. Maryland
1Opinion of the Court
THOMSEN, District Judge.
Defendant Government’s motion for summary judgment, under Rule 56(b), Fed.Rules Civ.Proc., 28 U.S.C.A., raises the question whether there is any material difference between (a) the facts in this case, as set out in the complaint, the affidavit in support of plaintiff’s opposition to motion for summary judgment and the papers and statements received ’ in evidence at the hearing on said motion, and (b) the facts in the case of U. S. v. Maryland Jockey Club of Baltimore City, 4 Cir., 210 F.2d 367, reversing, D.C., 118 F.Supp. 349, certiorari denied 347 U.S. 1014, 74 S.Ct.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Rothensies v. Electric Storage Battery Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Union Trust Co. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1940
- Electric Storage Battery Co. v. RothensiesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1946
- United States v. Maryland Jockey Club of Baltimore CityCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1954
- Southern Maryland Agricultural Ass'n of Prince George's County v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1954
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Southern Maryland Agricultural Ass'n v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1957
- Maryland Jockey Club v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1960
- Southern Maryland Agricultural Ass'n v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1955
- Southern Maryland Agricultural Association of Prince George's County v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1955
- Maryland Jockey Club of Baltimore City v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1964
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.