Legal Opinion
Motley v. Motley
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided August 13, 1999No. CIV. A. 98-391(JEI)PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
IRENAS, District Judge.
Before this court is defendant Thomas Motley’s (“defendant”) motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c). Defendant alleges that summary judgement is appropriate because plaintiff Ann Motley’s (“plaintiff’) claim is barred by the statute of limitations as set fourth in N.J.S.A. 12A:3-122 which requires that an action be commenced within six years after a note is negotiated.
The plaintiff disagrees and argues that summary judgment is inappropriate because the limitations period of N.J.S.A. 12A:3-118 controls and requires that a…
2Cases cited15 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
- Vera L. POLLOCK, Appellant, v. AMERICAN TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH LONG LINESCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1986
- J.E. Mamiye & Sons, Inc. v. The Fidelity Bank v. Commonwealth Marine and General Assurance Co., LtdCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fleet National Bank v. LibertySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2004
- Sarasota-Coolidge Equities II, LLC v. S. Rotondi and Sons, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2001
- Fleet National Bank v. LibertySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2004
- Fleet National Bank v. LibertySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2004