Legal Opinion
IMAX Corp. v. Capital Center
District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 11, 2016No. Civ. No. 1:15-CV-0378PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
SYLVIA H. RAMBO, United States District Judge
In this breach of contract action, Plaintiff has moved for judgment on the pleadings as to both its breach of contract claim and Defendant’s counterclaim regarding nonpayment of a lease for commercial motion picture equipment. For the reasons below, the court will grant Plaintiffs motion.
I. Background1
A. Facts
Plaintiff IMAX Corporation (“Plaintiff’ or “IMAX”) is a Canadian corporation that specializes in motion picture technologies, offering proprietary software and theater architecture and equipment for entertainment purposes. (Doc. 1,…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Salve Regina College v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Roger Turbe v. Government of the Virgin Islands, Virgin Islands Water and Power AuthorityCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1991
- Lorenz v. CSX Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1993
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Masciantonio v. SWEPI LPDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2016
- Helder Ramirez v. IDD Cars, LLC, et al.District Court, S.D. New York · 2025