Legal Opinion
Sty-Lite Co. v. Eminent Sportswear Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 20, 2000No. 97 CIV. 3901(RLC)PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBERT L. CARTER, District Judge.
Plaintiffs Sty-Lite Company (“Sty-Lite”) and Eurotex (Saipan), Inc. (“Euro-tex”) have instituted this action against defendants Eminent Sportswear Inc. (“Eminent”) and Christina Sportswear Ltd. (“Christina”) to recover payment for goods delivered. Plaintiffs have instituted this action against defendants Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Limited (“HSBC”) and Bank of China, New York Branch (“Bank of China”) for wrongful authorization of delivery of merchandise and for fraudulent misrepresentation. All defendants have moved pursuant to Rule 56,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Strawbridge v. CurtissSupreme Court of the United States · 1806
- Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. PattersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Schwartz v. Public AdministratorNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Tauza v. . Susquehanna Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Louisville, Cincinnati, & Charleston Rail-Road v. LetsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1844
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Comunale v. Home Depot, U.S.A., Inc.District Court, W.D. New York · 2018
- Alexander Romano, Kim Romano, & Travelers Pers. Ins. Co. v. Am. States Ins. Co.District Court, W.D. New York · 2017
- Island Global Yachting, Ltd. v. Poole Capital, S.A.District Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- Anil Kumar Singla v. Sherwood Partners, Inc., et al.District Court, S.D. New York · 2026
- Bates v. Offit Kurman Attorneys at Law LLPDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2019
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.