Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

C&C Construction & Maintenance, Inc. v. Nales-Martinez

District Court, Virgin Islands

Decided July 15, 2011No. D.C. Civil App. No. 2002/0093, Consolidated 2003/0023Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partHollar, Judge

I concur with the majority’s ruling that the Superior Court’s September 25, 2001 Order granting summary judgment, in part, in favor of Appellant, C&C Construction and Maintenance Inc., (“C&C” or “Appellant” or “Cross-Appellee”), is reviewable. I further concur with the majority’s ultimate decision, on the merits, to affirm the trial court’s partial summary judgment dismissing all counts of Appellee, Juan Nales-Martinez’s (“Martinez” or “Appellee” or “Cross-Appellant”) complaint except for the breach of contract (implied contract) cause of *1060action. I also concede that if the evidence was…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  2. International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (Uaw) v. National Labor Relations BoardCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1972
  3. Vance and Augusta Williams v. Martin Marietta Alumina, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1987
  4. National Labor Relations Board v. Chester Valley, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
  5. Rockingham MacHine-lunex Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1981

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API