Legal Opinion
Kinsey v. Cendant Corp.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided November 6, 2007No. 04 Civ. 0582PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ROBERT W. SWEET, District Judge.
The defendants Cendant Corporation (“Cendant”), Fairfield Resorts Inc. (“Fair-field”) and FFD Development Company, L.L.C. (“FFD”) (collectively the “Defendants”) have moved pursuant to Rule 56, Fed.R.Civ.P. to dismiss Counts 2, 9 and 10 of the Amended Complaint of plaintiff, Douglas Kinsey (“Kinsey” or the “Plaintiff’). Upon the findings and conclusions set forth below, the motion is granted.
Kinsey, an employee of Fairfield, then FFD, and then Fairfield again, seeks to enforce his rights to stock options which the Defendants assert have expired. The…
2Cases cited25 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
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Shelley Weinstock v. Columbia UniversityCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2000
- Western World Insurance Company v. Stack Oil, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Guest v. Allstate InsuranceNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2009
- Smith v. Zipcar, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 2015
- Kinsey v. Cendant Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2008
- Kinsey v. Cendant Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 2008
- Honig v. Riot Blockchain, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2020
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.