Legal Opinion
Scott v. Coughlin
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided October 23, 1996No. 90 Civ. 494 (RJW)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBERT J. WARD, District Judge.
Defendants Thomas A. Coughlin, III, Charles J. Scully, Robert Seitz, Charles R. Winch, Joseph Tanner, Stephen Albury, Gordon LaBonte, John R. Novak and Nelson K. Howe (“defendants”) have moved for an order pursuant to Rule 56(b), Fed.R.Civ.P., granting summary judgment on the grounds that there are no material facts in dispute and that defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Additionally, defendants have moved, pursuant to Rule 15(a), Fed. R.Civ.P., for an order granting leave to amend their answer to include the defense of collateral…
2Cases cited20 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
- Wolff v. McDonnellSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Sandin v. ConnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Hewitt v. HelmsSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Blaskiewicz v. County of SuffolkDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1998
- Byrd v. AbateDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1997
- Dupree v. PoughDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- Baez v. KahanowiczDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- Scott v. CoughlinDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000