Legal Opinion

Hartford Fire Insurance v. M/V "OOCL Bravery"

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided November 19, 1999No. 98 CIV. 347(DFE)Published

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

EATON, United States Magistrate Judge.

This lost cargo case is assigned to me for all purposes pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) and the parties’ consent given in July 1999. The first-named defendant (a ship) has apparently never been served. The other defendants are represented by Tisdale & Lennon, LLC. They say (and this is undisputed) that two of the defendants — OOCL (Europe) Ltd. and OOCL (USA) Inc. — are agencies acting on behalf of the second named defendant Orient Overseas Container Line (UK) Ltd. (referred to as “OOCL (UK)”). They also say that the fourth-named…

2Cases cited12 opinions

Leather's Best, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. S.S. Mormaclynx, Defendants-Appellants-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1971
New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad v. NothnagleSupreme Court of the United States · 1953
Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. v. Ss Hong Kong Producer, Her Engines, Etc., and Universal Marine CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
General Electric Company v. Mv Nedlloyd, Her Engines, Boilers, Nedlloyd Lijnen B v. (Nedlloyd Lines)Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
Caterpillar Overseas, S.A., Libellant-Appellant v. S.S. Expeditor and American Export Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.