Establishing secure connection…Loading editor…Preparing document…

Campbell v. General Motors Corp. 19 F. Supp. 2d 1260 ND

This template is fully customizable. Edit the text, fill out the fields, and send it for signature. Give it a try!

PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF FILINGS IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COUNTY, ALABAMA

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

, Plaintiff,

VS.

et al.,

Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION NO.:

CV-

COMES NOW Plaintiff, , by and through counsel, and states that Defendant, (hereinafter ), is not entitled to a judgment in their favor pursuant to Ala.R.Civ.P. 56, where genuine issues of material fact exist and said Defendant is not entitled to judgment as a matter of Alabama law. Plaintiff submits the following deposition excerpts, exhibits and affidavits:

  1. Excerpts from Deposition of specifically, pp. 5, 10, 12-14, 21, 31-35, 42, 45, 54, 55, 60, 86, 87, 98, 99, 108.
  2. Credit Union Payroll Deduction Form.
  3. 's Application.
  4. Revised Payroll Deduction Form.
  5. Affidavit of Plaintiff's expert,
  6. Excerpts from the Deposition of ; specifically, pp. 5, 7-10, and 11.
  7. 's Business Card.
  8. Documents from Alabama Department of Insurance relating to 's licensing status.
  9. Excerpts from Deposition of ; specifically, pp. 7, 10-14, 19-21, 24-28, 49-50, 64, 67, 82-83, 87-88, 94-97, 111-115, 117-118, 120-122, 137-143, 145-146, 153-154, 156-157.
  10. Sample Life Income Provider Form.
  11. Excerpts from the 1997 Deposition of Representative in v. In the Circuit Court of County, Alabama, Civil Action Number: CV-; specifically, pp. 5, 31-32, 50, 63-66, 84-87, 92-96, 99-100.

JOHN DOE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

Attorneys for Plaintiff

Post Office Drawer

Mobile, Alabama

BY:

Attorney

Number

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I do hereby certify that I have on this day of August, 1998, served a copy of the foregoing by mailing same by United States mail, first class postage prepaid and properly addressed to the following:

Attorney

Enter text✕
Prepare your document for signing right on this page
  • 01 Edit the text and complete the fields
  • 02 Click Sign Now and on the next screen add recipients and signature fields in SignNow
  • 03 Start your free trial to sign and send your doc
Sign Now

What Campbell v. General Motors Corp. 19 F. Supp. 2d 1260 ND Represents

Campbell v. General Motors Corp., 19 F. Supp. 2d 1260 (N.D.), is a published federal district court opinion identified by that citation. This page treats the citation as a legal source to be read for procedural posture, factual findings, and legal analysis rather than as a template or form. Use the opinion to locate holdings, understand court reasoning, and guide analogous pleadings or briefs in the same jurisdiction while verifying local procedural rules.

Why this decision matters for practitioners and researchers

Understanding the opinion clarifies the court's reasoning, applicable legal standards, and any narrow holdings that may control later litigation. It also helps practitioners draft briefs, identify persuasive precedent, and assess settlement strategy in comparable disputes.

Why this decision matters for practitioners and researchers

Who commonly consults this opinion

Typical users who will reference this decision in practice and research.

  • Litigators and appellate attorneys researching persuasive or binding district-court reasoning in the relevant circuit.
  • In-house counsel and compliance teams assessing risk or precedent for product-liability or corporate-defense matters.
  • Law students and academics analyzing case law, doctrine development, or procedural treatment of similar claims.

Use the decision within proper jurisdictional and procedural context; verify citation history before relying on it.

Anatomy of the published opinion you should review

A well-prepared read highlights six recurring components so you can extract precedent efficiently and accurately for briefs or internal memoranda.

Caption

Lists parties, court, and docket information; use for accurate citation and to locate the full opinion in reporters or databases.

Procedural Posture

Summarizes prior proceedings, motions at issue, and the stage of litigation to frame the holding's precedential weight.

Material Facts

Concise factual narrative the court used to resolve legal questions; distinguishing facts often limit the decision's broader applicability.

Legal Analysis

Court's application of statutes, rules, and precedent; focus on standard of review and key legal tests used by the judge.

Holding

Precise ruling on the specific issues before the court; extract exact language for citation in briefs or memorandum.

Disposition

Outcome (grant, deny, remand, dismiss) and any directions for further proceedings or factual development.

Essential citation and retrieval details

Case Citation: Campbell v. General Motors Corp. 19 F. Supp. 2d 1260
Court: Federal district court
Reporter: Federal Supplement, Second Series
Docket Number: Use court docket for exact number
Decision Date: Check reporter or court docket for date
Location: Northern District citation context

Step-by-step approach to analyze and use the opinion

Follow these practical steps to extract the decision's legal value for briefs or internal memoranda.

  • 01
    Locate the full text: Retrieve the complete opinion from the court docket or a reporter/database.
  • 02
    Read facts first: Identify material facts that the court relied on to shape the holding.
  • 03
    Extract the holding: Underline precise language to quote or paraphrase in briefing.
  • 04
    Check treatment: Verify subsequent history and citing decisions for continued validity.

How to configure document tracking and sharing for the opinion

Set up consistent workflow fields for internal review, redaction, and sharing when integrating the opinion into matter management systems.

Field Configuration
Retention Tag Assign matter-level retention policy and legal basis
Access Level Limit view/edit to responsible attorneys and paralegals
Redaction Requirement Flag if the opinion contains PII or confidential material
Distribution List Add counsel, client lead, and records manager

Where to file, archive, and distribute copies

Use formal channels and records systems to ensure authoritative copies and controlled distribution.

  • Court Docket: Official filing and public record maintained by the clerk
  • Opposing Counsel: Provide courtesy copies as required by rules or local practice
  • Internal Repository: Store the certified copy in the matter management system
  • Client File: Add a redacted or complete copy to the client-facing matter folder

Digital distribution and file-format considerations

Ensure files are stored and shared in formats compatible with court and client systems.

  • Accepted Formats: PDF, Word DOCX
  • Integrations: NetSuite | Google Workspace | Microsoft 365 compatibility
  • Security: AES-256 at rest, TLS 1.2/1.3 in transit

Use platforms that support audit trails and secure access control to preserve evidentiary value during sharing.

Timing considerations when relying on the opinion

Be mindful of procedural deadlines and subsequent-history filing windows that affect how and when you rely on the decision.

Appeal Window:

Confirm appellate filing deadlines with local rules and Fed. R. App. P. requirements

Motion Timing:

Check local rules for deadlines to file related motions or motions for reconsideration

Citing Update:

Allow time to verify negative or superseding treatment before submission

Record Preservation:

Retain supporting evidence per document retention policy

Client Notice:

Inform client of time-sensitive implications promptly after review

Common pitfalls when using this opinion in practice

  • Overreading the holding by applying factual distinctions that the court did not rely upon, creating weak persuasive authority.
  • Failing to check whether later appellate courts have affirmed, reversed, or limited the decision, leading to citation of stale precedent.
  • Using an unofficial or unverified copy lacking pagination and reporter citation, which can create citation or authenticity issues in filings.
  • Neglecting local rules about citation format, courtesy copies, or filing conventions that may result in procedural rejection.

Short-form risks of misusing the opinion

Mis-citation: Weakens credibility
Stale Precedent: Wrong legal basis
Unauthorized Sharing: Confidential data exposure
Missed Deadlines: Procedural sanctions
Inaccurate Quotation: Misstates court holding
Overbroad Reliance: Harms litigation strategy

Illustrative ways the opinion can influence case work

Two concise examples show how counsel might integrate the decision into litigation strategy or internal advisories.

Defense Brief Example

Draft cites the opinion for a narrow evidentiary principle that favors summary judgment

  • Court relied on similar facts and procedural posture
  • The brief contrasts differing facts and requests the same relief while preserving appellate issues.

In-House Memorandum

Legal team summarizes the holding and applicability to product designs

  • Short checklist translates the holding into compliance tasks
  • Memo recommends limited operational changes and monitoring appellate treatment.

Practical tips for citing and relying on the opinion

Follow these practices to preserve credibility and avoid overstatement when relying on district-court opinions.

Verify Subsequent Treatment
Always check whether the opinion was affirmed, reversed, or cited for a limited proposition; Shepardize or use equivalent citators before filing.
Quote Precisely
Use exact wording for key legal propositions and provide pinpoint citations to pages or paragraphs to aid judicial review.
Distinguish Facts
If facts differ materially from your case, explain distinctions clearly so the court can assess the opinion's persuasive weight.
Maintain Record Copies
Store a certified or reporter-issued copy in the matter file and retain a PDF with metadata showing retrieval source and timestamp.

eSignature platform pricing and feature snapshot for managing documents

Comparison of common eSignature vendors and starter pricing to help you plan document digitization and secure signature workflows. signNow appears first per vendor ordering rules.

signNow DocuSign Adobe Sign PandaDoc HelloSign
Starting Price $8/user/mo $15/user/mo $14/user/mo $19/user/mo $15/user/mo
Free Trial Yes, 7-day trial No No No Yes, limited
Bulk Send Yes Yes Yes Yes No
Audit Trail Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
HIPAA Compliant Yes Yes Yes No No

Common questions about using Campbell v. General Motors Corp. in practice

Answers address frequent issues about citation, electronic handling, and procedural checks when relying on a district-court opinion.


Need help? Contact support

Explore Templates

Bank Account Form New York Small Business Startup Forms Package New York Certificate of Incorporation for Professional Services Corporation
be ready to get more
Join over 28 million airSlate SignNow users
Sign Now
Company
Forms
Pricing
Resources
Knowledge base
Other Products
© 2026 airSlate Inc. All rights reserved.