Legal Opinion
Estrada v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
District Court, W.D. Texas
Decided July 17, 1995No. 2:94-cr-00052PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
BIERY, District Judge.
The Court considered the motion for summary judgment filed by State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“State Farm”), plaintiffs’ response and defendant’s reply. For the reasons stated below, defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.
Motions for summary judgment are authorized by Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. These motions permit the Court to resolve lawsuits without the necessity of trials if there is no genuine dispute as to any facts which are material. Rule 56(e) of the Federal…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Transportation Insurance Co. v. MorielTexas Supreme Court · 1994
- Arnold v. National County Mutual Fire Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1987
- Aranda v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaTexas Supreme Court · 1988
- Fireman's Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey v. Raymond DufresneCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- National Union Fire Insurance Co. of Pittsburgh v. Hudson Energy Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1991
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. WoodsDistrict Court, E.D. Texas · 1996
- Lias v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2001
- Metropolitan Life Insurance Company v. VasquezDistrict Court, N.D. Texas · 2024