Legal Opinion
DP Aviation v. Smiths Industries Aerospace & Defense Systems Ltd.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 28, 2001No. Nos. 99-35913, 00-35029PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GOULD, Circuit Judge:
This case concerns a monetary dispute over the award of incentive fees, or commissions, pursuant to a representation agreement. Appellees DP Aviation, M.C. Pietromonaco, Inc., and Micom, Inc. (collectively, “DPA”) alleged that Appellant Smiths Industries Aerospace and Defense Systems, Ltd. (“SIADS”) breached its representation agreement with DPA by refusing to pay incentive fees on products supplied by SIADS to The Boeing Company (“Boeing”). Following trial, judgment, and supplemental judgment, the district court awarded DPA unpaid incentive fees, underpaid incentive fees…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Berg v. HudesmanWashington Supreme Court · 1990
- B. Braun Medical, Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories and Np Medical, Inc., Defendants/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Lambert v. AckerleyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- United States v. StuartSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Dp Aviation v. Smiths Industries Aerospace And Defense Systems LtdCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Peng v. City of BellflowerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002