Legal Opinion
Allied Signal Technical Services Corp. v. M/V Dagmar Maersk
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided October 9, 2002No. CIV.A. WMN00-3730PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
NICKERSON, Senior District Judge.
Before the Court are Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Paper No. 29), Defendant Maersk’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Paper No. 27), and Defendant Connor’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Paper No. 28). The motions are ripe for decision. Upon a review of the pleadings and applicable case law, this Court determines that no hearing is necessary (Local Rule 105.6) and that Plaintiffs motion will be denied, and that Defendants’ motions will be granted.
/. BACKGROUND
This case involves a claim for damage to a space telescope owned by Plaintiff, Allied…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Taft Broadcasting Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1991
- ITCO Corp. v. Michelin Tire Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1983
- Towne Management Corp. v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1985
- Pacific Employers Insurance Company v. The M/v Gloria, Etc., Aquarius, Ltd., Defendants-Third Party v. Greenwich Marine, Inc., Third PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Moma Beauty Salon, Inc. v. Cletus Gaza, et al.District Court, D. Maryland · 2026