25 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 240,497 times 39 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 220,007 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
Krupski v. Costa Crociere S. P. A.
560 U.S. 538 (2010) Cited 1,317 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding claim relates back where plaintiff misunderstood which entity was in charge of ship that allegedly caused injury
Cooper v. Aviall
543 U.S. 157 (2004) Cited 425 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that the portion of § 113(f) cited above "rebuts any presumption that the express right of contribution provided by the enabling clause is the exclusive cause of action for contribution available to a [potentially responsible party]"
Foulk v. Charrier
262 F.3d 687 (8th Cir. 2001) Cited 435 times
Holding that the "district court did not err in declining to dismiss [plaintiff's] excessive force claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies" because the prison did not respond to his complaint and thus no further administrative proceedings were "available"
Barrow v. Wethersfield Police Dept
66 F.3d 466 (2d Cir. 1995) Cited 441 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "Rule 15(c) does not allow an amended complaint adding new defendants to relate back if the newly-added defendants were not named originally because the plaintiff did not know their identities"
RodrÍguez v. Municipality of San Juan
659 F.3d 168 (1st Cir. 2011) Cited 267 times
Holding that arguments "adverted to in a cursory fashion, unaccompanied by developed argument," are waived
Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) Implant Recipients v. Dow Chemical Co.
113 F.3d 1484 (8th Cir. 1997) Cited 323 times
Holding " genuine issue of material fact exists if the evidence is sufficient to allow a reasonable [finder of fact] to return a verdict for the nonmoving party."
ASARCO LLC v. Goodwin
756 F.3d 191 (2d Cir. 2014) Cited 127 times 1 Legal Analyses
Determining that a newly added claim in an amended complaint did not relate back because the original complaint "contained no facts whatever about" the newly added claim
Barrow v. Wethersfield Police Dept
74 F.3d 1366 (2d Cir. 1996) Cited 163 times
Holding that amended complaint substituting individual officers for "John Doe" defendants did not relate back to original complaint under Rule 15(c) because plaintiff's initial failure to name officers was due to lack of knowledge of their identity rather than a mistake regarding identity
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 335,102 times 160 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 93,618 times 92 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint
Rule 4 - Summons
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 72,180 times 128 Legal Analyses
Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time
Rule 30 - Depositions by Oral Examination
Fed. R. Civ. P. 30 Cited 16,693 times 133 Legal Analyses
Upholding a district court's decision not to consider the plaintiff's deposition errata sheets in opposition to a motion for summary judgment when they were untimely
Section 9601 - Definitions
42 U.S.C. § 9601 Cited 4,302 times 135 Legal Analyses
Adopting the definition of “disposal” contained in the Solid Waste Disposal Act
Section 9613 - Civil proceedings
42 U.S.C. § 9613 Cited 2,194 times 38 Legal Analyses
Granting federal district courts "exclusive original jurisdiction" of CERCLA actions

Asarco LLC v. NL Industries, Inc. et al

25 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Holding claim relates back where plaintiff misunderstood which entity was in charge of ship that allegedly caused injury

Holding that the portion of § 113(f) cited above "rebuts any presumption that the express right of contribution provided by the enabling clause is the exclusive cause of action for contribution available to a [potentially responsible party]"

Holding that the "district court did not err in declining to dismiss [plaintiff's] excessive force claim for failure to exhaust administrative remedies" because the prison did not respond to his complaint and thus no further administrative proceedings were "available"

Holding that "Rule 15(c) does not allow an amended complaint adding new defendants to relate back if the newly-added defendants were not named originally because the plaintiff did not know their identities"

Holding that arguments "adverted to in a cursory fashion, unaccompanied by developed argument," are waived

Holding " genuine issue of material fact exists if the evidence is sufficient to allow a reasonable [finder of fact] to return a verdict for the nonmoving party."

Determining that a newly added claim in an amended complaint did not relate back because the original complaint "contained no facts whatever about" the newly added claim

Holding that amended complaint substituting individual officers for "John Doe" defendants did not relate back to original complaint under Rule 15(c) because plaintiff's initial failure to name officers was due to lack of knowledge of their identity rather than a mistake regarding identity

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

Upholding a district court's decision not to consider the plaintiff's deposition errata sheets in opposition to a motion for summary judgment when they were untimely

Adopting the definition of “disposal” contained in the Solid Waste Disposal Act

Granting federal district courts "exclusive original jurisdiction" of CERCLA actions