Legal Opinion
McKenna v. Loonan
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided March 2, 2022No. 0:20-cv-01837Unknown
1Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA Joseph McKenna, Case No. 20-cv-1837 (WMW/HB) Plaintiff, ORDER v. Michael Loonan; Minnesota Shower and Bath; Rusco, Inc.; KSTP-TV; KMSP-TV; KARE; and WCCO-TV, Defendants. Before the Court are Defendants’ motions for summary judgment. (Dkts. 64, 73.) Plaintiff has not responded to either motion. For the reasons addressed below, the Court grants Defendants’ motions for summary judgment. BACKGROUND Plaintiff Joseph McKenna, a resident of Cottage Grove, Minnesota, alleges that Defendants Minnesota Rusco, Inc. d/b/a Minnesota Shower and Bath;…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1991
- Donna Krenik v. County of Le SueurCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
- Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. MuchnickSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.