639 F.2d 671 (10th Cir. 1981), 79-1491, Lindley v. Amoco Production Co.

Docket Nº79-1491.
Citation639 F.2d 671
Party NameRalph Herbert LINDLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. AMOCO PRODUCTION COMPANY and Floyd L. Walker, Defendants-Appellees.
Case DateJanuary 26, 1981
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Page 671

639 F.2d 671 (10th Cir. 1981)

Ralph Herbert LINDLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

AMOCO PRODUCTION COMPANY and Floyd L. Walker, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 79-1491.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit

January 26, 1981

Submitted Sept. 16, 1980.

Page 672

Douglas L. Boyd, Tulsa, Okl., for plaintiff-appellant.

Deryl Lee Gotcher and Roy C. Breedlove, of Jones, Givens, Brett, Gotcher, Doyle & Bogan, Inc., Tulsa, Okl., for defendants-appellees.

Before SETH, Chief Judge, LOGAN, Circuit Judge, and BOHANON, District Judge [*].

BOHANON, District Judge.

Lindley brought this action against Walker and Amoco pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of his constitutional right to privacy under the Fourteenth Amendment. The trial court awarded summary judgment to the defendants and Lindley appeals.

The claim arises out of a discovery order issued by an Oklahoma state judge during the course of a breach of employment contract action filed by Amoco against Lindley in an Oklahoma state court.

On appeal from an order granting a motion for summary judgment, the record is reviewed in light most favorable to the opposing party. Prochaska v. Marcoux, 632 F.2d 848 (10th Cir. 1980). Appellate courts must consider factual inferences tending to show triable issues so as to favor the existence of such issues. Frito-Lay, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union, 629 F.2d 653 (10th Cir. 1980). Taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the record reveals the following facts.

Lindley had worked for Amoco for a period of some twelve years, during which he invented a computer program to aid in the discovery of petroleum reservoirs. The method became known in the trade as the "Lindley Log Analysis System."

After Lindley's departure from Amoco, the Company sued Lindley in the Oklahoma state court asking specific performance of his employment contract and further to enjoin him from divulging the workings of the System to others. 1 During the course of litigation, the state trial judge concluded there was "reason to believe" that Lindley had not complied with the terms of a discovery order. Having learned from Lindley that he had numerous boxes of records at home, and upon motion of Amoco's counsel Walker, the trial judge issued an oral order permitting Walker to enter Lindley's home and seal the files. The state court found the power to take this...

To continue reading

Request your trial
50 practice notes
  • 825 F.2d 257 (10th Cir. 1987), 85-2601, Wheeler v. Hurdman
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
    • July 27, 1987
    ...a motion for summary judgment. Franks v. Nimmo, 796 F.2d 1230, 1235 (10th Cir.1986); Baker, 788 F.2d at 653; Lindley v. Amoco Prod. Co., 639 F.2d 671, 672 (10th Cir.1981). In this case, the essential facts governing our disposition on appeal (as opposed to how those facts are characterized ......
  • 117 B.R. 592 (Bkrtcy.D.Colo. 1990), 89 C 0457, In re Sacramento Mansion, Ltd.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Bankruptcy Courts Tenth Circuit
    • June 27, 1990
    ...view the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion." Id., citing, Lindley v. Amoco Production Co., 639 F.2d 671, 672 (10th Cir.1981)). Finally, a successful Rule 56 movant in the Tenth Circuit must demonstrate entitlement to summary judgment beyond a reasonabl......
  • 155 B.R. 531 (Bkrtcy.D.Colo. 1993), 92-2199, In re M & L Business Mach. Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Bankruptcy Courts Tenth Circuit
    • May 26, 1993
    ...judgment, the Court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. Lindley v. Amoco Production Co., 639 F.2d 671 (10th Cir.1981). See, also, Frito-Lay, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union Local No. 7, 629 F.2d 653 (10th Cir.1980); In re American Cable Publicati......
  • 591 F.Supp. 1172 (D.Kan. 1984), Civ. A. 80-2051, United Business Communications, Inc. v. Racal-Milgo, Inc.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 10th Circuit District of Kansas
    • July 24, 1984
    ...1970). Therefore, the court must view the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Lindley v. Amoco Production Co., 639 F.2d 671 (10th Cir. 1980). Furthermore, before summary judgment may be granted, the moving party must establish its entitlement to summary judgment beyo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
50 cases
  • 825 F.2d 257 (10th Cir. 1987), 85-2601, Wheeler v. Hurdman
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Courts of Appeals Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
    • July 27, 1987
    ...a motion for summary judgment. Franks v. Nimmo, 796 F.2d 1230, 1235 (10th Cir.1986); Baker, 788 F.2d at 653; Lindley v. Amoco Prod. Co., 639 F.2d 671, 672 (10th Cir.1981). In this case, the essential facts governing our disposition on appeal (as opposed to how those facts are characterized ......
  • 117 B.R. 592 (Bkrtcy.D.Colo. 1990), 89 C 0457, In re Sacramento Mansion, Ltd.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Bankruptcy Courts Tenth Circuit
    • June 27, 1990
    ...view the record in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion." Id., citing, Lindley v. Amoco Production Co., 639 F.2d 671, 672 (10th Cir.1981)). Finally, a successful Rule 56 movant in the Tenth Circuit must demonstrate entitlement to summary judgment beyond a reasonabl......
  • 155 B.R. 531 (Bkrtcy.D.Colo. 1993), 92-2199, In re M & L Business Mach. Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States Bankruptcy Courts Tenth Circuit
    • May 26, 1993
    ...judgment, the Court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion. Lindley v. Amoco Production Co., 639 F.2d 671 (10th Cir.1981). See, also, Frito-Lay, Inc. v. Retail Clerks Union Local No. 7, 629 F.2d 653 (10th Cir.1980); In re American Cable Publicati......
  • 591 F.Supp. 1172 (D.Kan. 1984), Civ. A. 80-2051, United Business Communications, Inc. v. Racal-Milgo, Inc.
    • United States
    • Federal Cases United States District Courts 10th Circuit District of Kansas
    • July 24, 1984
    ...1970). Therefore, the court must view the record in the light most favorable to the non-moving party. Lindley v. Amoco Production Co., 639 F.2d 671 (10th Cir. 1980). Furthermore, before summary judgment may be granted, the moving party must establish its entitlement to summary judgment beyo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results