§Why CasetextPricing

Kline et al v. Mortgage Electronic Security Systems et al

Reply re MOTION for Summary Judgment Reply in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment

14 Cited authorities

  1. Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation

    497 U.S. 871 (1990)   Cited 9,609 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to admit affidavits in support of standing when filed after summary judgment briefing and hearing were complete

  2. Guarino v. Brookfield Tp. Trustees

    980 F.2d 399 (6th Cir. 1992)   Cited 1,604 times
    Holding that a district court properly relies upon the facts provided by a moving party when a motion for summary judgment goes unopposed

  3. Stewart v. Coyne Textile Services

    212 F.R.D. 494 (S.D.W. Va. 2003)   Cited 24 times
    Finding the plaintiff "satisfied the good cause standard of Rule 16(b)" and noting a contrary ruling would "allow Defendants to benefit by their discovery violations by placing the onus on Plaintiff to seek amendment of her claims before Defendants have supplied their responses"

  4. Mesmer v. Rezza

    Civil Action No. DKC 10-1053 (D. Md. Nov. 14, 2011)   Cited 9 times

    Civil Action No. DKC 10-1053 11-14-2011 WILLIAM MESMER v. ROBERT REZZA, et al. DEBORAH K. CHASANOW MEMORANDUM OPINION Presently pending and ready for review in this civil rights case is the motion for relief from judgment or order and for permissive joinder of defendants filed by Defendant William Mesmer, proceeding pro se. (ECF No. 46). Also pending are two discovery motions. (ECF Nos. 48, 51). The issues have been briefed, and the court now rules, no hearing deemed necessary. Local Rule 105.6.

  5. Brown v. Voorhies

    Case No. 07-cv-13 (S.D. Ohio Mar. 30, 2012)   Cited 2 times

    Case No. 07-cv-13 03-30-2012 STEVEN S. BROWN, Plaintiff, v. WARDEN VOORHIES, et al., Defendants. GREGORY L. FROST JUDGE Magistrate Judge Terence P. Kemp OPINION AND ORDER This matter is before the Court on the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendants Mark Barrett, Terasa Shaver, Ron O'Brien, Marla Farbacher, Mary Jane Martin, Robert Krapenc, and the late Sheriff Jim Karnes. (ECF No. 275.) Despite numerous extensions of the case schedule and two extensions of time to respond to the Defendants'

  6. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Darkow

    Case No. 5:09CV02482 (N.D. Ohio Jul. 30, 2010)   Cited 3 times

    Case No. 5:09CV02482. July 30, 2010 MEMORANDUM OPINION SARA LIOI, District Judge This matter is before the Court on a motion of Defendant, Kathryn Dodge (sometimes referred to as "Kathryn" or "Dodge"), for summary judgment. (Doc. No. 19.) By her motion, Dodge seeks a determination that she is entitled to certain benefits under a life insurance policy issued by Interpleader Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. ("MetLife"). For the reasons that follow, Dodge's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. I.

  7. McDonald v. Ford Motor Co.

    208 F. Supp. 2d 837 (N.D. Ohio 2002)   Cited 8 times
    Granting summary judgment in favor of the employer where the plaintiff failed to offer any evidence that any similarly-situated, non-disabled employees were treated more favorably

  8. Hicks v. Barberton Police Dept

    CASE NO. 5:11cv76 (N.D. Ohio Mar. 8, 2012)

    CASE NO. 5:11cv76 03-08-2012 KEVIN HICKS, PLAINTIFF, v. BARBERTON POLICE DEPT., et al. DEFENDANTS. SARA LIOI JUDGE SARA LIOI MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER Before the Court is the unopposed motion for summary judgment filed by defendants Brian Davis ("Davis") and Martin Eberhart ("Eberhart") (collectively as "defendants"). (Doc. 22.). For the reasons that follow, defendants' motion is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED. Plaintiff's motion to amend (Doc. 15) is DENIED AS MOOT. I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL

  9. Nighswander v. Henderson

    Case No. 3:00CV7571 (N.D. Ohio Oct. 5, 2001)   Cited 7 times
    Denying summary judgment to defendant on plaintiff's failure-to-accommodate claim, even though plaintiff signed job offer for modified part-time flexible clerk position under protest, because defendant failed to present evidence showing that it tried to accommodate plaintiff by attempting first to reassign plaintiff to equivalent position with no loss of pay or benefits

  10. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 331,402 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  11. Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 6   Cited 49,437 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

  12. Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 5   Cited 22,480 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

  13. Section 2 - Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty

    15 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 4,408 times   30 Legal Analyses
    In § 2 cases under the Sherman Act, as in § 7 cases under the Clayton Act (Brown Shoe Co. v. United States, 370 U.S. 294, 325) there may be submarkets that are separate economic entities.

  14. Section 1692f - Unfair practices

    15 U.S.C. § 1692f   Cited 3,423 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Providing a non-exhaustive list of conduct that is unfair or unconscionable