From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kim v. Marina District Development Company, LLC

United States District Court, D. New Jersey, Camden Vicinage
Jul 14, 2010
Civil No. 09-1553 (RMB), [Dkt. Nos. 84 91] (D.N.J. Jul. 14, 2010)

Opinion

Civil No. 09-1553 (RMB), [Dkt. Nos. 84 91].

July 14, 2010


ORDER


This matter having come before the Court upon a motion for partial summary judgment, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56(a), by Defendant Marina District Development Company, LLC (the "Defendant"), and upon a cross-motion for partial summary judgment, pursuant to Local Civil Rule 7.1(h), by Plaintiff John Kim (the "Plaintiff"); and the Court having considered the moving papers, and the opposition thereto; and for the reasons expressed in the Opinion issued this date;

IT IS ON THIS 14th day of July 2010 , HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

Defendant's motion for partial summary judgment [Docket No. 84] is GRANTED; and

Defendant's cross-motion for partial summary judgment [Docket No. 91] is DENIED.


Summaries of

Kim v. Marina District Development Company, LLC

United States District Court, D. New Jersey, Camden Vicinage
Jul 14, 2010
Civil No. 09-1553 (RMB), [Dkt. Nos. 84 91] (D.N.J. Jul. 14, 2010)
Case details for

Kim v. Marina District Development Company, LLC

Case Details

Full title:DR. JOHN KIM, Plaintiff, v. MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC…

Court:United States District Court, D. New Jersey, Camden Vicinage

Date published: Jul 14, 2010

Citations

Civil No. 09-1553 (RMB), [Dkt. Nos. 84 91] (D.N.J. Jul. 14, 2010)

Citing Cases

SIPLER v. TRANS AM TRUCKING, INC.

This burden of proof may not be satisfied by proof of any degree of negligence including gross negligence.…

Picatinny Federal Cr. Union v. Federal Natl. Mortgage Assn

See also Rodriguez v. Hudson County Collision Co., 296 N.J. Super. 213, 220-21 (App. Div. 1997). "Apparent…