Legal Opinion

Proffitt v. Davis

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided February 17, 1989No. 87-1279PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

BECHTLE, District Judge.

Presently before the court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(b). For the reasons stated herein, after full consideration of the supporting legal briefs and affidavits, defendant’s motion for summary judgment will be granted.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff John Proffitt has been responsible for bringing a number of private citizen suit enforcement actions under various federal environmental statutes. 1 In the present action, plaintiff has brought suit, pro se, against the defendant Arthur Davis in his official capacity as…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. Goodman v. Mead Johnson & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Grine v. CoombsDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 2003
  2. Devin Taylor v. Andrew Bobby, et al.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2026
  3. MILLER v. GOGGINDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API