Legal Opinion
A.M.T. v. Gargano
District Court, S.D. Indiana
Decided February 10, 2011No. 1:10-mj-00358Published
1Opinion of the Court
DECISION ON PENDING MOTIONS
JANE MAGNUS-STINSON, District Judge.
Presently before the Court are Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment, [dkt. 64], Defendants’ Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings, [dkt. 78], and Defendants’ Alternative Motion Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(d), 1 [dkt. 91].
Plaintiffs sued Defendants Michael A. Gargano and Patricia Casanova (collectively, “Defendants”) in their official capacities with the Indiana Family and Social Services Administration (“FSSA”). In their Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants’ enforcement of 405 LA.C.…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Keith D. Schacht v. Wisconsin Department of CorrectionsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999
- Singer v. RaemischCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2010
- Tonja Treadway v. Gateway Chevrolet Oldsmobile Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2004
- United States v. CaputoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2008
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.