Xeta Corp. v. American Telecommunications Corp.

Tenth Circuit

Xeta Corp. v. American Telecommunications Corp.

37 F.3d 1510, 1994 WL 579351

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

DecidedOctober 20, 1994

Docket93-5260

StatusPublished

This text of 37 F.3d 1510 (Xeta Corp. v. American Telecommunications Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Xeta Corp. v. American Telecommunications Corp., 37 F.3d 1510, 1994 WL 579351 (10th Cir. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

37 F.3d 1510
NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

XETA CORPORATION, an Oklahoma Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
AMERICAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORP., a Delaware corporation,
also known as ATC, INC., a Delaware corporation, and its
subsidiary American Telecommunications Corp., a Texas
corporation, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 93-5260.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Oct. 20, 1994

ORDER AND JUDGMENT1

Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, McKAY, Circuit Judge, and BELOT,2 District Judge.Oct. 20, 1994.

American Telecommunications Corp., Inc. (ATC), appellant, appeals the granting of summary judgment against it in the amount of $149,859.14, and the setting of a supersedeas bond in the amount of $175,139.48. ATC has failed to demonstrate that there is a genuine issue of material fact with regard to its liability. ATC has also failed to demonstrate that the district court abused its discretion in setting the amount of the bond. We also find that jurisdiction and venue were proper in the Northern District of Oklahoma.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

1

This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of the court's General Order filed November 29, 1993. 151 F.R.D. 470

2

Honorable Monti L. Belot, United States District Judge for the District of Kansas, sitting by designation

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

37 F.3d 1510
NOTICE: Although citation of unpublished opinions remains unfavored, unpublished opinions may now be cited if the opinion has persuasive value on a material issue, and a copy is attached to the citing document or, if cited in oral argument, copies are furnished to the Court and all parties. See General Order of November 29, 1993, suspending 10th Cir. Rule 36.3 until December 31, 1995, or further order.

XETA CORPORATION, an Oklahoma Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
AMERICAN TELECOMMUNICATIONS CORP., a Delaware corporation,
also known as ATC, INC., a Delaware corporation, and its
subsidiary American Telecommunications Corp., a Texas
corporation, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 93-5260.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Oct. 20, 1994

ORDER AND JUDGMENT1

Before SEYMOUR, Chief Judge, McKAY, Circuit Judge, and BELOT,2 District Judge.Oct. 20, 1994.

American Telecommunications Corp., Inc. (ATC), appellant, appeals the granting of summary judgment against it in the amount of $149,859.14, and the setting of a supersedeas bond in the amount of $175,139.48. ATC has failed to demonstrate that there is a genuine issue of material fact with regard to its liability. ATC has also failed to demonstrate that the district court abused its discretion in setting the amount of the bond. We also find that jurisdiction and venue were proper in the Northern District of Oklahoma.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

1

This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of the court's General Order filed November 29, 1993. 151 F.R.D. 470

2

Honorable Monti L. Belot, United States District Judge for the District of Kansas, sitting by designation

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 F.3d 1510, 1994 WL 579351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/xeta-corp-v-american-telecommunications-corp-ca10-1994.