Haviland Clay Works Co. v. United States

169 F. Supp. 61, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2114
CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Ohio
DecidedDecember 13, 1955
DocketCiv. No. 7379
StatusPublished

This text of 169 F. Supp. 61 (Haviland Clay Works Co. v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Ohio primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Haviland Clay Works Co. v. United States, 169 F. Supp. 61, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2114 (N.D. Ohio 1955).

Opinion

KLOEB, District Judge.

Plaintiff moves the Court for summary judgment in its favor in accordance with the provisions of Rule 56(a) and (c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., on the ground that the pleadings and five affidavits attached thereto show that plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.,

Defendant moves the Court to deny plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the grounds that there are genuine issues as to material facts, and that the action should be tried upon the factual issues, and in support thereof attaches to its motion an affidavit designated Exhibit A and a statement of authorities designated Exhibit B.

We are of the opinion that the supporting papers to the motion filed by defendant are inadequate in form and content to raise a genuine issue as to any ma[62]*62terial fact. Engl v. Aetna Life Ins. Co., 2 Cir., 139 F.2d 469; Pen-Ken Gas & Oil Corp. v. Warfield Natural Gas Co., 6 Cir., 137 F.2d 871, certiorari denied 320 U.S. 800, 64 S.Ct. 431, 88 L.Ed. 483, and Rule 56(e) F.R.C.P.

Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is sustained. United States of America v. Cherokee Brick & Tile Co., 5 Cir., 1955, 218 F.2d 424, affirming Cherokee Brick & Tile Co. v. United States, D.C.M.D.Ga.1954, 122 F.Supp. 59; New Idria Quicksilver Mining Co. v. Commissioner, 9 Cir., 144 F.2d 918; International Talc Co., Inc., v. Commissioner, 15 T.C. 981. The latter two cases are cited and relied upon in the Cherokee Brick case in 122 F.Supp. at page 65.

Rule 52(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides in part the following :

“ * * * Findings of fact and conclusions of law are unnecessary on decisions of motions under Rules 12 or 56 ■or any other motion except as provided ■in Rule 41(b).”

Judgment may enter accordingly.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Cherokee Brick & Tile Company
218 F.2d 424 (Fifth Circuit, 1955)
Pen-Ken Gas & Oil Corp. v. Warfield Natural Gas Co.
137 F.2d 871 (Sixth Circuit, 1943)
Engl v. ætna Life Ins. Co.
139 F.2d 469 (Second Circuit, 1943)
Cherokee Brick & Tile Co. v. United States
122 F. Supp. 59 (M.D. Georgia, 1954)
International Talc Co. v. Commissioner
15 T.C. 981 (U.S. Tax Court, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
169 F. Supp. 61, 1955 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haviland-clay-works-co-v-united-states-ohnd-1955.