Legal Opinion
Barker v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, London
District Court, E.D. Michigan
Decided June 1, 1983No. Civ. 82-73682PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
RALPH M. FREEMAN, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on defendants’ motion for partial summary judgment on three of the five counts of the first amended complaint. Because this motion is directed solely at the allegations of the complaint, the Court will treat the motion as a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.Pro. 12(b)(6). It is well established that a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim must not be granted unless it appears beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Foman v. DavisSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- United States v. TurketteSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Gibbs v. BuckSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Clarence E. Bennett v. Kenneth Berg, Dan R. Sandford, Jr. v. Kenneth BergCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1982
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Haroco, Inc. v. American National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago, Walter E. Heller International Corporation, & Ronald J. GrayheckCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- SEDIMA, S.P.R.L., Appellant, v. IMREX COMPANY, INC., Gidon Armon and Jacob Armon, AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
- In Re Catanella and EF Hutton and Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1984
- Alfaro v. EF Hutton & Co., Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1985
- Saine v. A.I.A., Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 1984
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.