Legal Opinion

Sheridan v. Intern. Broth. Electrical Workers, Local 455

District Court, D. Massachusetts

Decided September 5, 1996No. Civil Action No. 95-30222-MAPPublished

1Opinion of the Court

PONSOR, District Judge.

Upon de novo review the report and recommendation is adopted in its entirety. Defendant’s motion is DENIED, and plaintiff’s ALLOWED. These rulings dispose of all cognizable issues. Moreover, the defendant’s future obligations are spelled out with reasonable clarity — certainly all clarity possible at this juncture. So ordered.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION WITH REGARD TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS AND FOR SANCTIONS (Docket No. 05) and PLAINTIFF’S CROSS-MOTION SUMMARY JUDGMENT (Docket No. 08)

NEIMAN, United States Magistrate Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §…

2Cases cited58 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Thomas v. ArnSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Samuel Mesnick v. General Electric CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1991
  4. United Public Workers of America v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  5. United States v. Emiliano Valencia-CopeteCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1986

53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API