Legal Opinion

Permanence Corp. v. Kennametal, Inc.

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided May 18, 1989No. 88-1442PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OPINION

RALPH M. FREEMAN, District Judge.

Before the court is defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(c). In this diversity action, plaintiff seeks damages for the breach of an implied obligation of a licensing agreement. Plaintiffs complaint includes the following averments:

4. On the 8th day of February, 1979, the parties hereto did enter into a written agreement, ..., whereby plaintiff PERMANENCE did assign to defendant KENNAMETAL the non-exclusive rights to manufacture and sell products made from, and pursuant to, certain patents as…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  4. United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  5. Ovall Dale Kendall v. The Hoover CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1984

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Permanence Corporation v. Kennametal, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API