Legal Opinion
Doe v. Roe No. 1, and Roe No. 2
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Decided April 7, 1995No. 94-3345PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McDADE, District Judge.
In this case premised upon diversity jurisdiction, Appellant Doe, 1 appeals from a final judgment entered on an order of the district court granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant/Appellee Roe # 1. Because Roe # 1 is one of two defendants in this case, Doe sought and was granted an order pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure directing the entry of a final judgment in favor of Roe # 1 and against Doe on all counts or claims made by Doe against Roe # 1. For the reasons set forth in this opinion, we affirm the decision of the district court.
2Cases cited12 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
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Bank Leumi Le-Israel, B.M., a Foreign Corporation v. Dennis Lee, an IndividualCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1991
- Diane M. Tobey v. Extel/jwp, Incorporated, and Stuart SchwartzCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1993
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Thomas P. Davis and Cathy M. Davis v. G.N. Mortgage Corporation and Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2005
- Valance v. Gaylon Wisel, Mike Reneau, Ed PearceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1997
- Doe v. Shults-Lewis Child & Family Services, Inc.Indiana Supreme Court · 1999
- Donald D. Lane v. Hardee's Food Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
- Stop-N-Go of Madison, Inc., and Rockford Stop-N-Go, Inc. v. Uno-Ven Co., and Pdv Midwest Refining, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.