Legal Opinion
Fetter v. Schink
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided October 1, 2012No. 11 Civ. 6239(JFK)PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION & ORDER
JOHN F. KEENAN, District Judge.
Currently before the Court are (1) Defendant Rosalie Schink’s (“Schink” or “Defendant”) motion for summary judgment and (2) cross motions to strike. For the reasons that follow, the motion for summary judgment is granted and the cross motions to strike are denied as moot.
I. Background
This is a breach of contract action, which was removed by Defendant from state court to this Court. Plaintiffs John Fetter, Fetter and Henderson Ltd., and Applied Technology Limited (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) hold patents for single point watering caps for…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Dallas Aerospace, Inc., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellant v. Cis Air Corporation, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2003
- Beyer v. County of NassauCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2008
- Zeising v. KellyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2001
- Kyle v. FordAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Jobanputra v. KimDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2024