Legal Opinion
Hi-Vac Corporation v. Coley
District Court, S.D. Ohio
Decided September 19, 2025No. 2:23-cv-04184Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION HI-VAC CORPORATION, et al., Plaintiffs, : v. Case No. 2:23-cv-4184 Chief Judge Sarah D. Morrison Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. DANIEL COLEY, et al., Preston Deavers : Defendants. OPINION AND ORDER Hi-Vac Corporation1 brought this action against Curtis Coley, six former Hi- Vac employees, and two limited liability companies. Now before the Court is Curtis’s Motion to Dismiss under Federal Rule 12(b)(1). (Mot., ECF No. 123.) For the reasons below, the Motion is DENIED. I. ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT When considering a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Kokkonen v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- The Ohio National Life Insurance Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- Musson Theatrical, Inc., and Modernage Photo Service, Inc., for Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. Federal Express CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
- United States v. Robert W. Ritchie, Personally and in His Capacity as a Partner/officer of Ritchie, Fels & Dillard, P.C.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1994
- Gentek Building Products, Inc., Steel Peel Litigation Trust, Formerly Known as Sherwin-Williams Claims Trust v. The Sherwin-Williams CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2007
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.