Legal Opinion
Mohnsam v. Nemes
District Court, W.D. Kentucky
Decided November 14, 2019No. 3:17-cv-00427Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY AT LOUISVILLE KURT K. MOHNSAM PLAINTIFF vs. CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:17-CV-427-CRS JASON M. NEMES, ET AL. DEFENDANT MEMORANDUM OPINION I. Introduction This matter is before the Court on Defendants Fultz Maddox Dickens PLC (“Fultz Maddox Dickens”) and Jason Nemes (“Nemes”), Acuity, A Mutual Insurance Company (“Acuity”), and Martin & Bailey, Inc.’s (“Martin & Bayley”) motions for summary judgment. DN 90; DN 96-1; DN 101. Plaintiff Kurt K. Mohnsam (“Mohnsam”) responded to each motion and requested oral arguments on all issues surrounding the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Scott v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Proctor Coal Co. v. TyeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1906
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.