Legal Opinion

Parsons & Whittemore Enterprises Corp. v. Cello Energy, LLC

District Court, S.D. Alabama

Decided May 7, 2009No. Civil Action 07-0743-CG-BPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER

CALLIE V.S. GRANADE, Chief Judge.

This matter comes before the court on plaintiff Parsons & Whittemore Enterprises Corporation’s (“P & W”) motion for partial summary judgment on the amended counterclaim (“counterclaim”) filed by Cello Energy, LLC (“Cello”), Boykin Trust, LLC (“Boykin Trust”), Jack W. Boykin (“Jack”), and Allen W. Boykin (“Allen”) (collectively the “Boykin defendants”). (Docs. 178, 300, and 318). The motion is briefed and ripe for ruling. (Docs. 333 and 360). For the reasons set forth below, the motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.

I. SUMMARY JUDGMENT STANDARD

Under…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Resolution Trust Corp. v. Dunmar Corp.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1995
  3. Burton v. City of Belle GladeCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1999
  4. Information Systems and Networks Corp. v. The City of Atlanta, Herbert L. McCallCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2002
  5. Waddell & Reed, Inc. v. UNITED INVEST. LIFE INS. CO.Supreme Court of Alabama · 2003

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. In re General Motors LLC Ignition Switch LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2017
  2. In re Takata Airbag Products Liability LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API