Legal Opinion
Donnkenny, Inc. v. Nadler
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided May 8, 1989No. 81 CIV. 6075 (SWK)PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
KRAM, District Judge.
Presently before this Court is the summary judgment motion of defendants Murray Nadler (“Nadler”), DK Investors, Inc. (“DKI”), Cummings & Carroll, P.C. and H.B. Carroll (“the accountants”). These defendants are referred to collectively as “the New York defendants”. The New York defendants alternatively seek judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The New York defendants also seek to have this Court set a hearing to determine the amount of fees and expenses that should be awarded to Nadler under…
2Cases cited22 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
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United Mine Workers of America v. GibbsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Canal Capital Corporation, a Delaware Corporation v. Valley Pride Pack, Inc., Also Known as Pine Valley Ii, Inc., a Wisconsin CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1999
- Canal Capital Corp. v. Valley Pride PackCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1999