§Why CasetextPricing

Conley v. Chaffinch

MOTION to Strike 144 Appendix, 139 Opening Brief in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment on Counts II and III and for Partial Summary Judgment on Count I -

9 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 239,217 times   38 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"

  2. Celotex Corp. v. Catrett

    477 U.S. 317 (1986)   Cited 218,869 times   40 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"

  3. Pamintuan v. Nanticoke Memorial Hosp

    192 F.3d 378 (3d Cir. 1999)   Cited 319 times
    Holding that it is not proper to consider, on summary judgment, evidence that would not be admissible at trial

  4. Wetzel v. Tucker

    139 F.3d 380 (3d Cir. 1998)   Cited 172 times

    NO. 97-7207 Argued: November 6, 1997 Filed March 23, 1998 On Appeal From the United States District Court For the Middle District of Pennsylvania, (D.C. Civ. No. 94-cv-00660). DONALD H. BROBST, ESQUIRE, (ARGUED), Rosenn, Jenkins and Greenwald, L.L.P., 15 South Franklin Street, Wilkes-Barre, PA 18711, Counsel for Appellant. JOSEPH J. HESTON, ESQUIRE, (ARGUED), Dougherty, Leventhal Price, L.L.P., 459 Wyoming Avenue, Kingston, PA 18704, Counsel for Appellees. Before: BECKER, ROTH, Circuit Judges, and

  5. New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. PPG Indust

    197 F.3d 96 (3d Cir. 1999)   Cited 101 times
    Finding costs may only be pursued by an innocent party that has undertaken hazardous waste cleanup

  6. Dillman v. Chaffinch

    313 F. Supp. 2d 415 (D. Del. 2004)   Cited 1 times

    Civil Action No. 02-509-KAJ April 14, 2004 Gary W. Aber, Esquire, Aber, Goldlust, Baker Over, Wilmington, Delaware, Counsel for Plaintiff Richard G. Placey, Esquire, Montgomery, McCracken, Walker Rhoads, LLP, Wilmington, Delaware, Of Counsel for Defendants Edward T. Ellis, Esquire, Robert J. Fitzgerald, Esquire, Montgomery, McCracken, Walker Rhoads, LLP, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Of Counsel for Defendants MEMORANDUM OPINION KENT JORDAN, District Judge Presently before me are two motions for partial

  7. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 333,232 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  8. Rule 1 - Scope and Purpose

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 1   Cited 15,441 times   49 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the federal rules of civil procedure should be employed to promote the "just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of every action and proceeding"

  9. Rule 804 - Exceptions to the Rule Against Hearsay-When the Declarant Is Unavailable as a Witness

    Fed. R. Evid. 804   Cited 4,023 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing an exception to the hearsay exclusionary rule when the party against whom the statement is offered has engaged in wrongdoing which procures the unavailability of the declarant