Legal Opinion
Ingersoll Milling MacHine Co. v. Granger
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided March 24, 1986No. 79 C 20076PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
ROSZKOWSKI, District Judge.
Before the court are various motions by the parties. For the reasons stated herein, judgment is entered on behalf of defendant on his counterclaim and against plaintiff on the complaint. Plaintiff is given until April 11, 1986, to file a response to defendant’s damage arguments. Defendant is given until April 25 to file his reply.
I. BACKGROUND
Much of the factual background in this case is well set out in the Magistrate’s May 27, 1980, Report and Recommendation and need not be repeated here; a brief summary will suffice for purposes of the instant motions.
This…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hilton v. GuyotSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Cunard Steamship Company Limited v. Salen Reefer Services Ab, United Brands Company, GarnisheeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1985
- Tahan v. HodgsonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1981
- Clubb v. ClubbIllinois Supreme Court · 1949
- Banco De Vizcaya v. First Nat. Bank of ChicagoDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1981
3Cited by5 opinions
- Ingersoll Milling MacHine Co. v. John P. GrangerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1987
- McCord v. Jet Spray International Corp.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1994
- Desjardins Ducharme v. HunnewellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1992
- Van Den Biggelaar v. WagnerDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1997
- Williams v. BowenDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1986