Legal Opinion

Strouss v. Michigan Department of Corrections

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided November 29, 1999No. 2:98-cv-72658PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS AND/OR FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

ROSEN, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

This Title VU/Seetion 1983 due process and equal protection action is presently before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and/or for Summary Judgment. Plaintiff has responded to Defendants’ Motion. The Court has reviewed and considered the parties’ respective briefs and supporting documents and has determined that oral argument on this matter is not necessary. Therefore, as counsel for the parties were advised, pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(e)(2), the Court will…

2Cases cited59 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. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Black v. Columbus Public SchoolsDistrict Court, S.D. Ohio · 2000
  2. Marquis v. Tecumseh Products Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2002
  3. Smith v. Aco, Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2005
  4. Santana v. U.S. Tsubaki, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2009
  5. Waller v. Daimler Chrysler Corp.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2005

5 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