Legal Opinion
Kendrick v. Town of Winchester/City of Winsted
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided May 26, 1998No. 3:97 CV 407(GLG)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM DECISION
GOETTEL, District Judge.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), defendant John Wilnauer moves to dismiss Counts Four, Five, and Six of plaintiffs amended complaint (document # 57). For the reasons discussed below, defendant’s motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs, Timothy and Cecelia Kendrick, operated a vending machine business, known as Kenco Vending. To conduct their business, plaintiffs leased a large warehouse from The Capitol Products Company (“Capitol Products”) at 81 Gay Street, Winsted, Connecticut. On January 13, 1996, the…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of NarcoticsSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Scheuer v. RhodesSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Odom v. MatteoDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2011
- Pagan v. ColonDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2022