Legal Opinion
New West Urban Renewal Co. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp.
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided November 21, 1995No. Civ. 94-1033 (WHW)PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED OPINION
WALLS, District Judge.
Plaintiff New West Urban Renewal Co. (“New West”) and defendant Westinghouse Electric Corporation (“Westinghouse”) have submitted cross-motions for summary judgment and partial summary judgment, pursuant to Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Pursuant to a Case Management Order issued by the Magistrate Judge, this motion presents two issues, referred to as: “The Contract Issue” and the “ECRA Issue.” For reasons stated below, the Court grants partial summary judgment to New West on the “Contract Issue,” and partial summary judgment to…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Lopez v. SwyerSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1973
- Montells v. HaynesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1993
- Sound Ship Building Corp v. Bethlehem Steel Company (Incorporated)Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Vispisiano v. Ashland Chemical Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Morristown Associates v. Grant Oil Company (073248)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2015
- M & M REALTY CO. v. Eberton Terminal Corp.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 1997
- Reichhold, Inc. v. United States Metals Refining Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2009
- New West Urban Renewal Co. v. Viacom, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2002
- Morristown Associates v. Grant Oil Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2013
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.