Legal Opinion

Marquardt Co. v. United States

United States Court of Federal Claims

Decided October 27, 2011No. 09-642 CPublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION & ORDER

HEWITT, Chief Judge.

Befox-e the eoux-t are Defendant’s Motion for Summax-y Judgment and Suppox-ting Memorandum of Law (Def.’s Mot.), Docket Number (Dkt. No.) 28, filed May 16, 2011; Defendant’s Proposed Findings of Uncontro-vex-ted Fact (DFUF), Dkt. No. 29, filed May 16, 2011; The Max-quardt Company’s Opposition to the Govei-nment’s Motion for Sum-max-y Judgment (Pl.’s Resp.), Dkt. No. 30, *267filed June 15, 2011; Plaintiffs Response to Defendant’s Proposed Findings of Uncontro-verted Fact (PL’s Resp. to DFUF), Dkt. No. 31, filed June 15, 2011; Defendant’s Reply to Plaintiffs…

2Cases cited53 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. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. United States v. TestanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  5. United States v. KingSupreme Court of the United States · 1969

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. GULF GROUP GENERAL ENTERPRISES CO. W.L.L., Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES, DefendantUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
  2. Seven Resorts, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013
  3. Stathis v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015
  4. Oasis International Waters, Inc. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2017
  5. Allen v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2015

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

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

Powered by the Exa API