Legal Opinion

Binger v. H.M.A. Investments, Inc.

District Court, D. Minnesota

Decided November 27, 1995No. Civ. No. 4-94-467Published

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

DOTY, District Judge.

This matter is before the court on the motion of plaintiff Virginia M. Binger for summary judgment. Based upon a review of the file, record and proceedings herein, and for the reasons stated below, the court grants plaintiffs motion.

BACKGROUND

This is an action to enforce a $1,350,000 promissory note (the “Binger Note”) made by defendant H.M.A. Investments, Inc. (“H.M.A.”), personally guaranteed by defendant Howard M. Appel (“Mr. Appel”), and made payable to plaintiff Virginia M. Binger (“Mrs. Binger”). The dispute between the parties arises from a series of…

2Cases cited10 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. Camfield Tires, Inc. v. Michelin Tire CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1983
  5. Modern Computer Systems, Inc. v. Modern Banking Systems, Inc. Modern Banking Systems of Southern WisconsinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1989

5 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