Legal Opinion
Ferrostaal, Inc. v. M/V Sea Phoenix
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided May 3, 2006No. 05-1837PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BARRY, Circuit Judge.
Appellant Ferrostaal claims that steel coils belonging to it were damaged in transit from Tunisia to New Jersey. The District Court granted partial summary judgment to the defendants, now appellees, holding that the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (“COGSA”), ch. 229, 49 Stat. 1207 (1936), 46 U.S.C. app. §§ 1300-1315, limited their liability to Ferrostaal to $500 per package. Ferrostaal appeals, arguing that COGSA does not govern this transaction and that the “fair opportunity” doctrine precludes enforcement of the $500 limitation. We hold that the District Court correctly…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Yamaha Motor Corp., USA v. CalhounSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Liverpool & Great Western Steam Co. v. Phenix InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. James N. Kirby, Pty Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Hart v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Henley v. Marine TransportionCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1994
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Beazer East, Inc. v. Mead CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2008
- Incubadora Mexicana, SA de CV v. Zoetis, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2015
- Koshani v. BartonDistrict Court, E.D. Tennessee · 2019
- Amazon Produce Network, LLC v. M/V LYKES OSPREYDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2008
- Ferrostaal, Inc. v. M/V Sea PhoenixCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2006
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.