Legal Opinion
Kingvision Pay Per View, Ltd. v. Duermeier
District Court, D. Kansas
Decided October 21, 1998No. Civil Action 97-2609-KHVPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
VRATIL, District Judge.
Kingvision Pay Per View, Ltd. (“Kingvision”) seeks statutory damages under the Cable Communications Policy Act of 1984, codified as amended at 47 U.S.C. § 521 et seq., for defendants’ unauthorized exhibition of a prize fight between Mike Tyson and Evander Holyfield. 1 This matter comes before the Court on the Motion of Defendants For Summary Judgment (Doc. #34) filed September 29, 1998, and the Motion of Plaintiff Kingvision Pay Per View For Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. #32) filed September 8, 1998. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Goldman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1942
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Dish Network L.L.C. v. World Cable Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2012
- National Satellite Sports, Inc. v. Eliadis, Inc.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1999
- DIRECTV, LLC v. PeruginiDistrict Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2014