Stedman v. Hoogendoorn, Talbot, Davids, Godfrey & Milligan
District Court, N.D. Illinois
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
SHADUR, Senior District Judge.
Remaining defendants Hoogendoorn, Talbot, Davids, Godfrey & Milligan (a Chicago law firm referred to here as “Hoogendoorn Firm”) and Edward Willey d/b/a Edward Willey Commercial Investigations (‘Willey”) have moved for summary judgment in this multi-count diversity-of-eitizenship action brought against them by W. David Stedman (“Stedman”). Their motions target all of Stedman’s claims as advanced against Hoogendoorn Firm and Willey in the Third Amended Complaint (the “Complaint”). To prepare the motions for resolution, all the parties…
2Cases cited26 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
- Moorman Manufacturing Co. v. National Tank Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1982
- Bank Leumi Le-Israel, B.M., a Foreign Corporation v. Dennis Lee, an IndividualCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1991
- Pelham v. GriesheimerIllinois Supreme Court · 1982
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Magellan International Corp. v. Salzgitter Handel GmbHDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1999
- Rousey v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1996