Legal Opinion
Mid-State Fertilizer Co. v. Exchange National Bank of Chicago
District Court, N.D. Illinois
Decided July 6, 1988No. 87 C 1078PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
HART, District Judge.
Plaintiffs in this case are Mid-State Fertilizer Company and its two shareholders, Lasley and Maxine Kimmel. The Kimmels are also officers of Mid-State. The defendant is The Exchange National Bank of Chicago. 1 In February 1985, Exchange provided a two-million-dollar line of credit to Mid-State. Repayment of this loan was secured by a security agreement imposing a first lien on all of Mid-State’s nonreal property, including accounts receivable, inventory, equipment, general intangibles, and proceeds. The Kimmels also personally guaranteed the…
2Cases cited51 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Sedima, S. P. R. L. v. Imrex Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Haroco, Inc. v. American National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago, Walter E. Heller International Corporation, & Ronald J. GrayheckCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1985
- American Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Chicago v. Haroco, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Parsons Steel, Inc. v. First Alabama BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Rose v. BartleCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Vicom, Inc. v. Harbridge Merchant Services, Inc., as Successor in Interest to Peach Tree Bancard Corporation, Judy Elliot, James ElliotCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1994
- Reddy v. Litton Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1990
- Mid-State Fertilizer Co., Lasley Kimmel, and Maxine Kimmel v. Exchange National Bank of ChicagoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
- Busby v. Crown Supply, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1990
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.