Legal Opinion

Day v. Bicknell Minerals, Inc.

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided July 15, 1985No. 4-1084A283PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CONOVER, Judge.

Defendants and cross-complainants, Day, et al. (shareholders), appeal the entry of partial summary judgment against them on their cross-complaint.

We affirm.

ISSUE

At issue is whether the trial court erred by entering partial summary judgment in favor of Bicknell on shareholders' cross-complaint.

FACTS

In the summer of 1980, Union Miniere, S.A., a Belgian corporation, and its subsidiary, Union Mines, Inc., a Maryland corporation, (together U.M.) began negotiating with the shareholders of Bicknell Minerals, Inc. (BMI) for the purchase of BMI. Throughout these negotiations U.M. was…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Raymundo v. Hammond Clinic Ass'nIndiana Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Hunter v. MilhousIndiana Court of Appeals · 1973
  3. Keystone Square Shopping Center Co. v. Marsh Supermarkets, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. Barnd v. BorstIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. Lucas v. FrazeeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Day v. Union Mines Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
  2. Ellis v. SmithIndiana Court of Appeals · 1988
  3. Day v. Union Mines Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
  4. Skaggs v. Merchants Retail Credit Ass'nIndiana Court of Appeals · 1988
  5. Flynn v. AerChem, Inc.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 2000

9 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