Legal Opinion
Steiner Corp. v. Johnson & Higgins
District Court, D. Utah
Decided September 29, 2000No. 88-CV-410 GPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS LEAVE TO AMEND TO PLEAD THE “ECONOMIC LOSS RULE”
J. THOMAS GREENE, District Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendants’ Motion for Leave to Amend Answer. The matter was fully briefed by the parties and oral argument on the motion was presented to the court during the hearing on April 25, 2000, at which time argument was also offered as to the issues remanded by the Tenth Circuit in its 1998 appellate decision, reported at Steiner Corp. v. Johnson & Higgins, 135 F.3d 684 (10th Cir.1998) (“Steiner II”).
Now, being fully advised, the court enters its Order Denying…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- East River Steamship Corp. v. Transamerica Delaval Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Robert H. E. Frank, Jerry D. Mooberry, Tyrone G. Moreno v. U.S. West, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1993
- Seely v. White Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1965
- Franks v. NimmoCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1986
- Congregation of the Passion v. Touche Ross & Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1994
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Air Products & Chemicals, Inc. v. Eaton Metal Products Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2003
- Cleveland Indians Baseball Co. L.P. v. New Hampshire InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
- Farmers Alliance Mutual Insurance v. NaylorDistrict Court, D. New Mexico · 2007
- Cleveland Indians Baseball Co. L.P. v. New Hampshire InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013