Legal Opinion
Nautilus Marine, Inc. v. Niemela
District Court, D. Alaska
Decided September 16, 1996No. A95-364-CV (JWS)PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER FROM CHAMBERS
SEDWICK, District Judge.
I. MOTIONSPENDING
At Docket 26, defendant John “Porter” O’Hara (“O’Hara”) moves for partial summary judgment dismissing the claims asserted . by plaintiff , Nautilus Mariné, Inc. (“Nautilus Marine”) for economic losses. The motion joins and incorporates by reference the motion for summary judgment filed by defendant Ocean Beauty Seafoods, Inc. (“Ocean Beauty”).
At Docket 31, plaintiffs Nautilus Marine, Avalon Leasing, Inc., Erling Carlson, and Larry Gray (“plaintiffs”) oppose and move to continue O’Hara’s motion. Alternatively, plaintiffs move to…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Robins Dry Dock & Repair Co. v. FlintSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Marvin MacKey Lillian MacKey Husband and Wife v. Pioneer National Bank, a National Banking Corporation Paul Campbell, Marie Campbell, Husband and WifeCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- Union Oil Company v. James J. Oppen and John J. MastersonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1974
- The JasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Conti Corso Schiffahrts-Gmbh & Co. Kg Nr. 2 v. Kaptanoglu"District Court, S.D. New York · 2006