Legal Opinion

Harriet & Henderson Yarns, Inc. v. Castle

District Court, W.D. Tennessee

Decided December 3, 1999No. 97-3032 DAPublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

DONALD, District Judge.

Before the court are Plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment and Defendants’ motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint includes six counts, and Plaintiffs have moved for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability as to four of those counts. For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiffs’ motion is denied in its entirety. Defendants have moved for summary judgment as to the entire case. For the reasons…

2Cases cited44 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. Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
  5. Thaddeus-X and Earnest Bell, Jr. v. BlatterCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1999

39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. New Gold Equities Corp. v. Jaffe Spindler Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2018
  2. In Re Lower Bucks HospitalUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012
  3. Atlantic Global Yield v. U.S. Bank National AssociationDistrict Court, D. South Dakota · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API