Legal Opinion
Kozak v. Hillsborough Public Transportation Commission
District Court, M.D. Florida
Decided February 16, 2010No. 6:04-cv-01162PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
JAMES D. WHITTEMORE, District Judge.
BEFORE THE COURT is Defendant Hillsborough County Public Transportation Commission’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. 96), Plaintiffs pro se response in opposition (Dkt. 106), and Defendant’s reply (Dkt. 111). On January 5, 2010, the Court heard oral argument on the motion. Upon consideration, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.
Plaintiff operates a ground transportation service utilizing a 15 passenger vehicle and a 7 passenger mini-van. Plaintiffs business is based in Hernando County. Plaintiff also contracts with individuals and…
2Cases cited44 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
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Regency Transportation Group, Ltd. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2012
- Ocean City Express Co. v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2014
- Kozak v. Hillsborough County, Fla.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2011