Kimcrest, Inc. v. McKesson Corporation Digital Equipment Corporation Dan Doe 3 P M, Inc.

Eighth Circuit

Kimcrest, Inc. v. McKesson Corporation Digital Equipment Corporation Dan Doe 3 P M, Inc.

48 F.3d 1224, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11556, 1995 WL 72325

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedFebruary 23, 1995

Docket94-2370

StatusPublished

This text of 48 F.3d 1224 (Kimcrest, Inc. v. McKesson Corporation Digital Equipment Corporation Dan Doe 3 P M, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kimcrest, Inc. v. McKesson Corporation Digital Equipment Corporation Dan Doe 3 P M, Inc., 48 F.3d 1224, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11556, 1995 WL 72325 (8th Cir. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

48 F.3d 1224
NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.

KIMCREST, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
McKESSON CORPORATION; Digital Equipment Corporation; Dan
Doe; 3 P M, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 94-2370.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 13, 1995.
Filed: Feb. 23, 1995.

Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Kimcrest appeals from a final order of the district court1 granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants on its negligence and breach of contract claims. Kimcrest contends that the district court misconstrued the limitations of a computer hardware service agreement at issue in the case. After a careful review of the record, we conclude that the district court correctly granted the defendants summary judgment for the reasons set forth in its well reasoned opinion. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa

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

48 F.3d 1224
NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.

KIMCREST, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
McKESSON CORPORATION; Digital Equipment Corporation; Dan
Doe; 3 P M, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 94-2370.

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 13, 1995.
Filed: Feb. 23, 1995.

Before BOWMAN, BEAM, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Kimcrest appeals from a final order of the district court1 granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants on its negligence and breach of contract claims. Kimcrest contends that the district court misconstrued the limitations of a computer hardware service agreement at issue in the case. After a careful review of the record, we conclude that the district court correctly granted the defendants summary judgment for the reasons set forth in its well reasoned opinion. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

The Honorable Ronald E. Longstaff, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Iowa

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 F.3d 1224, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 11556, 1995 WL 72325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kimcrest-inc-v-mckesson-corporation-digital-equipm-ca8-1995.