Legal Opinion
Proshipline Inc. v. Aspen Infrastructures Ltd.
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided February 1, 2008No. 07 Civ. 10969PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
Defendant Aspen Infrastructures Ltd. (“Aspen” or the “Defendant”) has moved pursuant to Supplemental Admiralty Rule E(4)(f) of the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure to vacate the Order and Process of Maritime Attachment and Garnishment issued at the request of plaintiff ProShip-Line Inc. (“ProShipLine” or the “Plaintiff’).
For the reasons set forth below the motion is granted, and the attachment is vacated.
Prior Proceedings
On August 6, 2007, EP-Team, Inc. (“EP-Team”) and ProShipLine jointly filed suit against Aspen in the United States District Court for the Southern…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Aqua Stoli Shipping Ltd. v. Gardner Smith Pty Ltd., Docket No. 05-5385-CvCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Dolco Investments, Ltd. v. Moonriver Development, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- Ronda Ship Management Inc. v. Doha Asian Games Organising, CommitteeDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2007
- Maersk, Inc. v. Neewra, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2006
- Steamship Overdale Co. v. TurnerDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1913
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- In Re Atlas Shipping A/SUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2009
- ProShipLine Inc. v. Aspen Infrastructures Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- ProShipLine, Inc. v. Aspen Infrastructures, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009
- ProShipLine Inc. v. Aspen Infrastructures Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
- Proshipline Inc. v. Aspen Infrastructures Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.