Day v. Bicknell Minerals, Inc.
Indiana Court of Appeals
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
- Raymundo v. Hammond Clinic Ass'nIndiana Supreme Court · 1983
- Hunter v. MilhousIndiana Court of Appeals · 1973
- Keystone Square Shopping Center Co. v. Marsh Supermarkets, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1984
- Barnd v. BorstIndiana Court of Appeals · 1982
- Lucas v. FrazeeIndiana Court of Appeals · 1984
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Day v. Union Mines Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
- Ellis v. SmithIndiana Court of Appeals · 1988
- Day v. Union Mines Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1988
- Skaggs v. Merchants Retail Credit Ass'nIndiana Court of Appeals · 1988
- Flynn v. AerChem, Inc.District Court, S.D. Indiana · 2000
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.