Legal Opinion
Haley v. MANNESMANN DEMATIC RAPISTAN CORP.
District Court, S.D. Mississippi
Decided July 7, 2000No. 3:98-cv-00728PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
WINGATE, District Judge.
THIS MATTER came on for hearing on May 12, 2000, before the court on the motion of the defendants, Mannesmann Dematic Rapistan Corporation, Mannes-mann Rapistan Corporation, Demag Acquisition Corporation, Rapistan Demag Corporation, and LSI Corporation, for summary judgment pursuant to Rule 56(b), 1 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff opposes the motion. The court, having reviewed the undisputed facts as presented in the defendants’ motion and the plaintiffs response to the motion, having reviewed the parties’ memoranda of law and having heard…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kennett-Murray Corporation v. John E. BoneCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
- Sandy Diana HIRRAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION D/B/A Amtrak, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996
- Horton v. American Tobacco Co.Mississippi Supreme Court · 1995
- Pickering v. Industria Masina I TraktoraMississippi Supreme Court · 1999
- American Federated General Agency, Inc. v. City of RidgelandDistrict Court, S.D. Mississippi · 1999
3Cited by1 opinion
- Medish v. Johns Hopkins Health System Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 2017