Legal Opinion
Loengard v. Santa Fe Industries, Inc.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided October 6, 1983No. 82 Civ. 7919 (KTD)PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
KEVIN THOMAS DUFFY, District Judge:
Defendants, Santa Fe Industries, Inc. (“Santa Fe”), Santa Fe Natural Resources, Inc. (“Resources”), and Kirby Forest Industries, Inc. (“Kirby”), move for summary judgment on the ground that the claims asserted by the plaintiffs, who will be collectively referred to as the Loengard plaintiffs, are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. For the reasons that follow, the defendants’ motion for summary judgment is denied in part, and granted in part.
The action instituted by the Loengard plaintiffs arose out of a “cash-out merger”…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- American Pipe & Construction Co. v. UtahSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Santa Fe Industries, Inc. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Crown, Cork & Seal Co. v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Loengard v. Santa Fe Industries, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Pereira v. Centel Corp. (In Re Argo Communications Corp.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1991
- Fezzani v. Bear, Stearns & Co., Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2004
- Monaghan v. SZS 33 Associates, L.P.District Court, S.D. New York · 1993
- Ackerman v. National Property Analysts, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1992
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.