Legal Opinion
Barclay v. Keystone Shipping Co.
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided January 11, 2001No. CIV.A.00-1572PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
KATZ, Senior District Judge.
Plaintiff Victor Francis Barclay joined the oil tanker M/T Ocean City as a QMED (qualified member of the engineering department) in late November 1998 under a contract, also known as articles of agreement, to serve 120 days aboard the vessel. The Ocean City is operated by defendant Keystone Shipping Company and, during the time relevant to this action, traveled between Singapore, Kuwait, and Australia. Mr. Barclay left the Ocean City in Australia on February 25, 1999, prior to the expiration of his contract, under circumstances that give rise to…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- East River Steamship Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Williams v. Borough of West ChesterCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1989
- Executive Jet Aviation, Inc. v. City of ClevelandSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Holmes v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011
- Sloan v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2009
- Holmes v. StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2011