Grigsby
Grigsby v. CMI Corp.
Opinion
Opinion
Schwarzer, J.
MEMORANDUM OF OPINION AND ORDER
The remaining defendants, CMI Corporation (“CMI”), CMI Financial Services, Inc. (“CMIFS”), and Edward Cherney, have moved for summary judgment or to dismiss. The Torchmark defendants have heretofore been dismissed for lack of personal jurisdiction.
When defendants’ motion first came before the Court, it was denied without prejudice, the parties being advised that the Court would at a later time reconsider its ruling. Notice of the Court’s intention was given to the parties on December 13, 1983, when the Court sent counsel a proposed memorandum of opinion and order granting summary judgment on the ground of lack of materiality. Counsel were given an opportunity to conduct further discovery under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56(f), to submit additional papers and to argue the matter at a further hearing held April 27, 1984. Thereafter, the parties were permitted to file post-hearing memoranda. The Court has considered the memoranda and arguments of counsel and now issues its final ruling in this matter.
A. Background Facts
In 1979, CMI incorporated a subsidiary, CMIFS, to develop and finance equipment lease transactions, primarily involving computers. It hired…