Legal Opinion
Circle K Corp. v. United States
United States Court of Claims
Decided August 2, 1991No. 12-86TPublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
MOODY R. TIDWELL, III, Judge.
This case is before the court on defendant’s motion under RUSCC 59 to reconsid*660er and alter or amend the judgment. For the reasons stated below, the court denies defendant’s motion.
FACTS
On May 14, 1990, defendant filed a motion for partial summary judgment. On September 10, 1990, plaintiff filed its opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment, but did not therein cross-move for summary judgment. Nevertheless, on May 16,1991, this court, sua sponte, granted partial summary judgment in favor of plaintiff. 23 Cl.Ct. 161. The court agreed with defendant…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Mingus Constructors, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Corn Products Refining Co. v. CommissionerSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Barmag Barmer Maschinenfabrik Ag v. Murata MacHinery Ltd., and Murata of America, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Cool Fuel, Incorporated v. William H. Connett, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Mega Construction Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1993
- Bishop v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1992
- Aerolease Long Beach v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1994
- Seldovia Native Ass'n v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 1996
- Dairyland Power Cooperative v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.