Legal Opinion

Seaplus Line Co. Ltd. v. Bulkhandling Handymax As

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided December 13, 2005No. 05 Civ. 4813(JGK)PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

KOELTL, District Judge.

The defendant, Bulkhandling Handymax AS (“Bulkhandling”), has moved pursuant to Supplemental Rules E(4), E(5), E(6), and E(7) of the Supplemental Rules for Certain Admiralty and Maritime Claims of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to vacate, or to reduce, an order of maritime attachment obtained against it by the plaintiff, Seaplus Line Co. Ltd. (“Seaplus”) or, in the alternative, to substitute a letter of undertaking for the attachment. The defendant also moves for security in connection with a claim for costs in a pending arbitration.

I

Seaplus is a…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corporation v. Empresa Naviera Santa S.A.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
  2. Seawind Compania, S. A. v. Crescent Line, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
  3. Integrated Container Service, Inc. v. Starlines Container Shipping, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1979
  4. Winter Storm Shipping, Ltd. v. TPICourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
  5. Linea Naviera De Cabotaje, C.A. v. Mar Caribe De Navegacion, C.A.District Court, M.D. Florida · 2001

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Aqua Stoli Shipping Ltd. v. Gardner Smith Pty Ltd., Docket No. 05-5385-CvCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
  2. In Re Atlas Shipping A/SUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 2009
  3. Wajilam Exports (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. v. ATL Shipping Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 2006
  4. Maersk, Inc. v. Neewra, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2006
  5. Ullises Shipping Corp. v. FAL Shipping Co. Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 2006

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

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API