Dana Corporation v. United States, Defendant-Cross

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that summary judgment was appropriate in that tax refund suit because issues of law were the only disputed issues before the trial court
• “Summary judgment was appropriate here because no material facts were disputed, many being stipulated, and the only .disputed issues were issues of law.”
• “Summary judgment was appropriate here because no material facts were disputed, many being stipulated, and the only disputed issues were issues of law.”
• “It necessarily follows from the standard set forth in the rule that when the only issues to be decided in the case are issues of law, summary judgment may be granted.”
• “It necessarily follows from the standard set forth in the rule that when the only issues to be decided in the case are issues of law, summary judgment may be granted.”
• “Summary judgment was appropriate here [in Dana Corp.] because no material facts were disputed, many being stipulated, and the only disputed issues were issues of law. Moreover, on each issue one party or the other is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).