Legal Opinion
Aurigemma v. Arco Petroleum Products Co.
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided October 26, 1988No. Civ. H-85-683 (PCD)PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING ON CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
DORSEY, District Judge.
I.Facts and Procedural History
Plaintiffs operated gasoline stations and convenience stores pursuant to an “AM-PM Mini Market Agreement” and “Lessee Dealer Gasoline Agreement” with defendant Arco. By letter dated May 21, 1985, Arco informed plaintiffs that it intended to terminate each respective petroleum and convenience store operation as of November 30, 1985. The reason given for this termination was Areo’s intended withdrawal from the marketing of motor fuel in Connecticut under 15 U.S.C. § 2802(b)(2)(E) of the Petroleum…
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
- Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- United States v. Diebold, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Annette Heyman v. Commerce and Industry Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Petereit v. S.B. Thomas, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Ackley v. Gulf Oil Corp.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1989
- Millett v. Union Oil Co. of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1994
- Bronx Auto Mall, Inc. v. American Honda Motor Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
- Rudel MacHinery Co. v. Giddings & Lewis, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1999
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.