Legal Opinion

Hardy Bros. Body Shop v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

District Court, S.D. Mississippi

Decided March 30, 1994No. 3:92-cv-00368PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

WINGATE, District Judge.

Before the court is the motion of the defendant State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (hereinafter “State Farm”) for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(b) 1 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. By its motion, State Farm avers that it is entitled to judgment on all of plaintiffs’ claims' by virtue of the undisputed facts and applicable law. The plaintiffs oppose the motion.

I. INTRODUCTION

At the center of this controversy is State Farm’s Auto Damage Claim Policy. Before announcing this Policy, State Farm surveyed automobile…

2Cases cited38 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. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  5. Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Chalk v. BertholfCourt of Appeals of Mississippi · 2007
  2. Medison America, Inc. v. Preferred Medical Systems, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. Tennessee · 2007
  3. Addison v. Allstate InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · 1999
  4. Monsanto Co. v. ScruggsDistrict Court, N.D. Mississippi · 2004
  5. Christmon v. Allstate InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2000

2 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