Legal Opinion

Lombardo v. Saint Louis City

District Court, E.D. Missouri

Decided February 1, 2019No. Case No. 4:16-CV-01637-NCCPublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

NOELLE C. COLLINS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

*886MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 63).1 The Motion is fully briefed and ready for disposition. For the following reasons, Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment will be GRANTED.

I. Legal Standard

Summary judgment is appropriate when no genuine issue of material fact exists in the case and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett , 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986). The initial burden is placed on the moving…

2Cases cited59 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. Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Pearson v. CallahanSupreme Court of the United States · 2009

54 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Lombardo v. St. LouisSupreme Court of the United States · 2021
  2. Fondren v. WhiteDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 2020
  3. Lombardo v. St. LouisSupreme Court of the United States · 2023
  4. Timpa v. The City of DallasDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API