Legal Opinion

Byrd v. Outokumpu Stainless, USA, LLC

District Court, S.D. Alabama

Decided June 14, 2022No. 1:20-cv-00520Unknown

1Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION DANIEL BYRD, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION 20-0520-WS-M ) OUTOKUMPU STAINLESS USA, LLC, ) ) Defendant. ) ORDER This matter is before the Court on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (Doc. 35). The parties have filed briefs and evidentiary materials in support of their respective positions, (Docs. 36, 37, 40, 41, 44), and the motion is ripe for resolution.1 After careful consideration, the Court concludes the motion for summary judgment is due to be denied. BACKGROUND According to the…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Texas Department of Community Affairs v. BurdineSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
  4. Bill Clark Herbert Futch Austin Hurst Louis Sliker and William Barrineau v. Coats & Clark, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1991
  5. John D. Chapman v. Ai TransportCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2000

28 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