Legal Opinion
Wingard v. Exxon Co., U.S.A.
District Court, D. South Carolina
Decided October 28, 1992No. Civ. A. 3:90-2714-21PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
AMENDED ORDER
TRAXLER, District Judge.
This matter is before me on the motion of the defendant (“Exxon”) for summary judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56. 1 I grant the motion as to all causes of action.
I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD
The standard for granting summary judgment is well known.
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c) states, as to a party who has moved for summary judgment:
The judgment sought shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issues as to any material fact and…
2Cases cited25 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Lackey v. Green Tree Financial Corp.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1998
- Hooters of America, Inc. v. PhillipsDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1998
- Southern Contracting, Inc. v. H.C. Brown Construction Co.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1995
- JHW Sr., Inc. v. Exxon Co., USADistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1996
- Williams-Garrett v. MurphyDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 2000
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.