Sander P. Stagman v. James Ryan, Joseph Claps, Edward Ludwig, and Richard Jones

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the court did not abuse its discretion in finding that deposing Illinois’s .attorney general “would serve no useful purpose”
• holding that mere speculation or conjecture in an affidavit is insufficient to preclude summary judgment
• holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion to compel deposition of Illinois Attorney General where evidence did not indicate a need for the deposition
• holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion to compel deposition of Illinois Attorney General where evidence did not indicate a need for the deposition
• holding statements in an affidavit about another person’s knowledge lacked personal knowledge foundation and were speculation
• declining to make admissibility arguments for (continued...) Nos. 03-2308 & 03-2661 23 enforcing the specific prohibition contained in the AMAA as to unfair competition.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).