Karkut v. Target Corp.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
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
- 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
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Graham v. ConnorSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Illinois v. GatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Lawson v. Pennsylvania SPCADistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
- Antony Barasky v. Kevin Dent, et al.District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · 2025
- BALZORA v. BALATGEKDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2024
- BERRY v. R. SELLERSDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
- BERRY v. R. SELLERSDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2023
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.