Legal Opinion
Kreider v. F. Schumacher & Co.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided March 1, 1993No. Civ. A. 91-446-JLLPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
LATCHUM, Senior District Judge.
I. INTRODUCTION
Third-party defendant, Mahoney-Troast Construction Company, (“Mahoney-Troast”) has moved for summary judgment against defendant and third-party plaintiff, F. Schu-macher & Co. (“Schumacher”) pursuant to Rule 56(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Docket Item [“D.I.”] 48.) The underlying action is a negligence suit brought by Sterling Kreider, an employee of Maho-ney-Troast, and his wife, Linda Kreider, seeking damages for injuries sustained when Mr. Kreider, during the course of his employment with Mahoney-Troast, fell…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Day & Zimmermann, Inc. v. ChallonerSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Travelers Indemnity Co. v. LakeSupreme Court of Delaware · 1991
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Precision Air, Inc. v. Standard Chlorine of Delaware, Inc.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1995
- Fina, Inc. v. ArcoCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2000
- Fina, Inc. v. ArcoDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 1998
- Fina, Inc. v. ArcoCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2000