Legal Opinion
Alliance Shippers, Inc. v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.
District Court, C.D. California
Decided November 17, 1986No. Civ. A. 86 3837 TJHPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SOUTHERN PACIFIC'S AMENDED STATEMENT OF UNCONTROVERT-ED FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
HATTER, District Judge.
Defendant Southern Pacific Transportation Company (“SP”) hereby submits its proposed Statement of Uncontroverted Facts and Conclusions of Law as required by Local Rule 7.14.1.
For the purpose of SP’s Motion for Summary Judgment, and for that purpose only, SP is adopting as facts those alleged by plaintiff Alliance Shippers, Inc. (“Alliance”) in its Complaint.
A. Uncontroverted Facts
1. Alliance is a New Jersey corporation with its principal place of business in New Jersey. (Complaint, U 4.)
2…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
- Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. Colgate & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corp. v. Arkansas Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- G. & T. Terminal Packaging Co., Inc. And Anthony Spinale v. Consolidated Rail CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
- Alliance Shippers, Inc. v. Southern Pacific Transportation CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1988
- Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Atlantic Pacific International, Inc.District Court, D. Hawaii · 1999
- G. & T. Terminal Packaging Co., Inc. And Anthony Spinale v. Consolidated Rail CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987