Legal Opinion

United States v. Maritime Exch. Museum

District Court, E.D. Michigan

Decided March 26, 2018No. Case No. 16–cv–13198PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

*549see also Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Cormetech, Inc., 848 F.3d 754, 758 (6th Cir. 2017) ("A mere scintilla of evidence or some metaphysical doubt as to a material fact is insufficient to forestall summary judgment.").

III. ANALYSIS

Both sides agree that the lenses were originally property of the United States. Where they disagree is whether the record of subsequent events, presented at this summary judgment stage, establishes that the United States has lost its ownership interest. The Government contends that only properly authorized acts by Government employees are sufficient to terminate its…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. United States v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Royal Indemnity Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1941
  3. Shaw v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1880
  4. Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Cormetech, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
  5. United States v. Richard SteinmetzCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1992

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. United States v. RoweDistrict Court, S.D. Alabama · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API