Legal Opinion
Riverdale Mills Corp. v. United States
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided March 16, 2004No. CIV.A.00-40137-NMGPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
GORTON, District Judge.
This case arises out of claims for malicious prosecution and violation of plaintiffs’ Fourth and Fifth Amendment Rights. Pending before the Court are three motions for summary judgment filed by the four defendants.
T „ , , I. Background
Procedural History
This case has a long procedural history before the Court. In 1998 the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), in the name of the United States, brought criminal proceedings against plaintiffs River-dale Mills Corporation (“Riverdale Mills”) and its owner, James M. Knott (“Knott”). The government alleged…
2Cases cited21 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
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Riverdale Mills Corp. v. PimpareCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2004