EQUITY INVESTMENTS PARTNERS, LP, PLAINTIFF-COUNTER-DEFENDANT-APPELLANT,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, DEFENDANT-COUNTER-CLAIMANT-APPELLEE, RANDOLPH LENZ, DEFENDANT-COUNTER-DEFENDANT APPELLANT, EQUITY INVESTMENT PARTNERS, LLC, COUNTER-DEFENDANT APPELLANT

11th Cir. | 2010-04-29
No. 09-14871
Before BIRCH and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and HODGES, District Judge.
604 F.3d 1291 Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit (2010) Caution
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM: Subsequent to the briefing in this case we decided the case of Equity Investment Partners, LP v. Lenz, 594 F. 3d 1338 (11th Cir.2010). Having requested and received supplemental briefing in this case from the parties, it is clear that the district court relied upon a legal principle that was rejected by our court in Lenz in granting summary judgment to the appellee. Accordingly, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court and REMAND the case for further consideration in light of Lenz. Appellee’s motion to reschedule oral argument from May 13, 2010 to May 11, 2010 is hereby DENIED as moot. REVERSED AND REMANDED.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Kernel Records OY v. Mosley, 694 F.3d 1294 (11th Cir. 2012)
    …hat we should rely on one of these grounds as an alternative rationale to affirm the grant of summary judgment. We decline to exercise our discretion to consider these alternative grounds. See Palmyra Park Hosp., Inc. v. Phoebe Putney Mem’l Hosp., 604 F. 3d 1291, 1306 n. 15 (11th Cir.2010). . A district court may disregard an affidavit as a sham when a party to the suit files an affidavit that contradicts, without explanation, prior deposition testimony on a material fact. Van T. Junkins & Assocs., Inc. v…
  • Simpson v. Sanderson Farms, Inc., 744 F.3d 702 (11th Cir. 2014)
    …al of a civil RICO complaint that does not articulate enough facts to "allegef] plausible economic injury.” AstraZeneca, 634 F. 3d at 1364-70. . The plaintiffs cite to an antitrust case, Palmyra Park Hospital Inc. v. Phoebe Putney Memorial Hospital, 604 F. 3d 1291 (11th Cir.2010), to argue that we will accept vague descriptions of “economic forces” as factual at the pleading stage. Pet’r’s Rep. Br. 15-16. But Palmyra does not stand for the broad principle that the plaintiffs extract from it. Contrary to their…
  • Duty Free Americas, Inc. v. The ESTÉE Lauder Cos., Inc., 797 F.3d 1248 (11th Cir. 2015)
    …ate that it has Article III standing to challenge Estée Lauder’s contractual requirements, it plainly follows that it cannot establish what our cases have referred to as “antitrust standing.” See Palmyra Park Hosp. Inc. v. Phoebe Putney Mem’l Hosp., 604 F. 3d 1291, 1299 (11th Cir.2010) (“To have antitrust standing, a party must do more than meet the basic ‘case or controversy’ requirement that would satisfy constitutional standing; instead, the party must show that it satisfies a number of prudential consider…

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw