1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.
  4. 803 F.Supp.
  5. 803 F.Supp. 237 (1992)
 

HOLEMAN v. NEILS

No. CIV 90-0832 PHX CAM.

803 F.Supp. 237 (1992)

Haskell v. HOLEMAN, Plaintiff, v. William C. NEILS, and George S. Wright, Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Arizona.

May 8, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Lee A. Henderson, Steven T. Hetland, Hessian, McKasy & Soderberg, Minneapolis, Minn., David W. Dow, Mohr, Hackett, Pederson, Blakley, Randolph & Haga, P.C., Phoenix, Ariz., for plaintiff.

Michael B. Scott, Crowe & Scott, P.A., Phoenix, Ariz., for defendant William C. Neils.

Kevin D. Ray, Lieurance, Wright & Ray, P.C., Phoenix, Ariz., for defendant George S. Wright.

ORDER

MUECKE, District Judge.

Having considered the parties' motions for summary judgment, the Court concludes as follows:

Background

Plaintiff has filed a twelve count complaint arising out of a real estate investment entered into by plaintiff and the two defendants for real property in Tucson, Arizona. Plaintiff seeks to recover his investment in the real property. Plaintiff has filed a motion for partial summary judgment on counts...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases