Legal Opinion
United States v. American Mercantile Corp.
District Court, W.D. Tennessee
Decided August 24, 2012No. 11-2371-STA-cgcPublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING IN PART, DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
S. THOMAS ANDERSON, District Judge.
Before the Court is the government’s Motion for Summary Judgment (D.E. # 22) filed on December 12, 2011. Defendants American Mercantile Corporation, Ingredients Corporation of America, and Damon S. Arney have filed a response in opposition to Plaintiffs Motion. The government has filed a reply, and Defendants have filed a sur-reply. For the reasons set forth below, Plaintiffs Motion is GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART. The Court reserves ruling on the permanent injunction sought by…
2Cases cited52 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,768 Phil A. Street and Clyde H. Street v. J.C. Bradford & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1990
- United States v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Huang v. Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 2018
- United States v. N.Y. Fish, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2014
- United States v. Scotty's Inc.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 2016