How cited: Cluster 596178 · Go Syfert

Cluster 596178

green · 115 citation events across 8 courts. Showing the 20 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Quote Authority · 8th Cir. · signal: see also
Stat. § 347.088.2 (1); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1221 (8th Cir. 1992) (“It does not follow that acting according to the terms of the by-law is a breach of good faith and fair dealing.”).
“It does not follow that acting according to the terms of the by-law is a breach of good faith and fair dealing.”
Rule Authority · D. Minnesota
R.Civ.P. 56(e); Celotex Corp., 477 U.S. at 317 , 106 S.Ct. at 2549-50 ; Unigroup, Inc., 980 F.2d at 1219-20.
Rule Authority · 10th Cir.
Moreover, we are unwilling to rewrite what both parties agree is an express and unambiguous bylaw right via the rubric of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing: "[i]t does not follow that acting according to the terms of the by-law is a breach of good faith and fair dealing." Unigroup, 980 F.2d at 1221.
Rule Authority · 10th Cir.
Moreover, we are unwilling to rewrite what both parties agree is an express and unambiguous bylaw right via the rubric of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing: “[i]t does not follow that acting according to the terms of the by-law is a breach of good faith and fair dealing.” Unigroup, 980 F.2d at 1221.
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Unigroup v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer, 980 F.2d 1217 , 1222 (8th Cir.1992).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Unigroup v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer, 980 F.2d 1217 , 1222 (8th Cir. 1992).
Cited · 6th Cir. · signal: see
See Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1221 (8th Cir.1992); Terry A. Lambert Plumbing, Inc. v. Western Sec.
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1222 (8th Cir.1992).
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Unigroup, Inc. v. O'Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1222 (8th Cir.1992). 56 Harmon has devoted less than three pages of briefing to this issue and has cited only one case.
Cited · 8th Cir. · signal: see
See Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1222 (8th Cir.1992) (applying Missouri law).
Cited (see also) · Miss. Ct. App. · signal: see also
La. 1989) (holding that “the mere failure to pay ‘fair value’ for stock under a stock redemption agreement” is not “fraud or breach of fiduciary duty”), aff’d., 898 F.2d 150 (5th Cir. 1990); see also Unigroup Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1221 (8th Cir. 1992) (upholding corporate repurchase provision permitting 20 payment of “book value” and finding that there was no duty to pay “fair value” under that provision); Kanawha-Roane Lands Inc. v. Burfor…
upholding corporate repurchase provision permitting 20 payment of “book value” and finding that there was no duty to pay “fair value” under that provision
Cited (see also) · D. Minnesota · signal: see also
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty, Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50, 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1219 (8th Cir.1992). “‘Only disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment.’ ” DePugh v. Smith, 880 F.Supp.…
quoting Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248 , 106 S.Ct. 2505
Cited (see also) · D. Minnesota · signal: see also
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(e); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 , 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50 , 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1219 (8th Cir.1992). “‘Only disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment.’ ” DePugh v. Smith, 880 F.Supp…
quoting Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248 , 106 S.Ct. 2505
Cited (see also) · D. Minnesota · signal: see also
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(a); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 , 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50, 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1219 (8th Cir.1992). “[S]ummary judgment procedure is properly regarded not as a disfavored procedural shortcut, but rather as an integral part of the Federal Rules as a whole, which are designed to …
green Westley v. Mann (2012)
Cited (see also) · D. Minnesota · signal: see also
R.Civ.P. 56(a); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50, 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1219 (8th Cir.1992).
Cited (see also) · D. Minnesota · signal: see also
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50 , 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1219 (8th Cir.1999). ‘“Only disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment.’ ” DePugh v. Smith, 880 F.Supp.…
quoting Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248 , 106 S.Ct. 2505
Cited (see also) · D. Minnesota · signal: see also
P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 , 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50, 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1219 (8th Cir.1999). “‘Only disputes over facts that might affect the outcome of the suit under the governing law will properly preclude the entry of summary judgment.’ ” DePugh v. Smith, 880 F.Supp. 651, 656 …
quoting Anderson, 477 U.S. at 248, 106 S.Ct. 2505
Cited (see also) · D. Minnesota · signal: see also
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23 , 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50 , 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1219 (8th Cir.1992). “[Sjummary judgment procedure is properly regarded not as a disfavored procedural shortcut, but rather as an integral part of the Federal Rules as a whole, which are designed to…
Cited (see also) · 8th Cir. · signal: see also
Stat. § 347.088.2 (1); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1221 (8th Cir.1992) (“It does not follow that acting according to the terms of the by-law is a breach of good faith and fair dealing.”).
Cited (see also) · D. Minnesota · signal: see also
Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(c); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322-23, 106 S.Ct. 2548 , 91 L.Ed.2d 265 (1986); Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50, 106 S.Ct. 2505 , 91 L.Ed.2d 202 (1986); see also Unigroup, Inc. v. O’Rourke Storage & Transfer Co., 980 F.2d 1217 , 1219 (8th Cir.1992). “[S]um-mary judgment procedure is properly regarded not as a disfavored procedural shortcut, but rather as an integral part of the Federal Rules as a whole, which are designed to …