Skip to main content
· 4/4/2014

Michael Queen v. Ed Schultz

Citations

  • 409 U.S. App. D.C. 149
  • 747 F.3d 879
  • 2014 WL 1328338
  • 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 6241

How courts have described this case

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

  • “In an appeal from an order granting summary judgment, our review is de novo . . . .”
  • “summary judgment is not available when material facts are susceptible to divergent inferences”
  • “Whether a partnership exists is an issue of fact, turning less on the presence or absence of legal essentials than on the intent of the parties gathered from their agreement, conduct, and the circumstances surrounding their transactions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Griffith, Srinivasan, Edwards

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.