Legal Opinion
United States v. 7.6 Acres of Land on Chapel Road
District Court, D. Vermont
Decided November 29, 1995No. Civ. No. 1:88CV2PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (paper 34)
MURTHA, Chief Judge.
Background
As the party moving for summary judgment, the State of Vermont has the initial burden of informing the Court of the basis for its motion and of identifying those parts of the record which it believes demonstrate the absence of a genuine issue of material fact. See Latimer v. Smithkline and French Laboratories, 919 F.2d 301, 303 (5th Cir.1990) (citing Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 106 S.Ct. 2548, 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986)). Where, as here, a motion for summary judgment is supported by affidavits and other…
2Cases cited12 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
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. Parcel of Rumson, NJ, LandSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- prod.liab.rep.(cch)p 12,749 Thomas Latimer, Et Ux, Carol Latimer v. Smithkline & French Laboratories, a Division of Smithkline Beckman Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1990
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Town of Sanford v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Maine · 1997
- United States v. Real Property Located at 19 Crane Park, Hattiesburg, Lamar County, MississippiDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · 2022