Legal Opinion
Getty Refining and Marketing Co. v. Zwiebel
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided March 19, 1985No. Civ. N-81-550 (PCD)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
DORSEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff, Getty Refining and Marketing Company, seeks specific performance of an option to purchase property which is the subject of a lease between plaintiff and defendants, H.F. Zwiebel and Muriel T. Zwiebel. Jurisdiction is invoked pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332, on the basis of diversity citizenship. Plaintiff has moved for summary judgment, Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, asserting that there is no genuine issue of fact and that it is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. For the reasons stated below, plaintiff’s motion…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Annette Heyman v. Commerce and Industry Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
- Martin Katz and Louana Katz v. The Goodyear Tire and Rubber CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
- Loomis v. Norman Printers Supply Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1908
- Robinson v. WeitzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Osprey L.L.C v. Kelly-Moore Paint Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1999
- James West v. State Farm Fire and Casualty CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Heyman v. M & R Apparel, Inc. (In Re M & R Apparel, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · 1988
- Lakeview v. Care Realty, et al.District Court, D. New Hampshire · 2009
- Uri Sasson V Howard MannDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2019