Legal Opinion
Armstrong v. Target Stores Incorporated
District Court, D. Arizona
Decided October 19, 2020No. 2:19-cv-01941Unknown
1Opinion
1 WO 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 8 9 Tiffany Armstrong, No. CV-19-01941-PHX-JJT 10 Plaintiff, ORDER 11 v. 12 Target Stores Incorporated, et al., 13 Defendants. 14 15 16 At issue is Defendant Target Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment Re: 17 Plaintiff’s Claims (Doc. 45, MSJ), to which Plaintiff Tiffany Armstrong filed a Response 18 (Doc. 51, Resp.) and Target filed a Reply (Doc. 53, Reply). The Court finds this matter 19 appropriate for resolution without oral argument. See LRCiv 7.2(f). For the following 20 reasons, the Court concludes…
2Cases cited9 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
- First Nat. Bank of Ariz. v. Cities Service Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Taylor v. ListCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Lewis Eisenberg v. Insurance Company of North America, Cigna CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.