Legal Opinion

Bancroft v. THE TECUMSEH PRODUCTS CO.

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided December 20, 1996No. Civil Action 95-40466Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

GADOLA, District Judge.

This is an action governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. Before the court are cross-motions for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c). Plaintiffs, Violetta and George Bancroft, (“Plaintiffs”), filed their motion for summary judgment on October 18, 1996. The defendant, Teeumseh Products Company, (“Defendant”), also filed its motion for summary ■ judgment…

2Cases cited16 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. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. BruchSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Ovall Dale Kendall v. The Hoover CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984

11 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