Legal Opinion

Karkut v. Target Corp.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided September 28, 2006No. Civil Action 04-3396PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM

BAYLSON, District Judge.

I. Introduction

In this case against Target Corporation (“Target”) and Police Officer Daniel R. Buckley, Defendants have separately moved for summary judgment. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant Target’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 31) and Defendant Buckley Motion (Doc. No. 32) will be granted, except for certain state law claims against Target.

II. Background

A. Factual Background

In connection with the summary judgment proceedings, the moving parties filed statements of undisputed facts, to which the Plaintiff, Nancy Karkut, 1 has responded…

2Cases cited33 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. Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983

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

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Lawson v. Pennsylvania SPCADistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
  2. Antony Barasky v. Kevin Dent, et al.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2025
  3. BALZORA v. BALATGEKDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2024
  4. BERRY v. R. SELLERSDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
  5. BERRY v. R. SELLERSDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2023

22 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