Legal Opinion
Gulf Oil Corp. v. Panama Canal Co.
District Court, Canal Zone
Decided June 5, 1967No. 6135PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DISMISSING AMENDED COMPLAINT
CROWE, District Judge.
This case was submitted on defendant’s motion to dismiss the amended complaint and as there is yet no denial of the facts set out therein, for the purposes of the motion they are as recited in the Amended Complaint and need not be repeated here.
The motion to dismiss is base upon three reasons. Number 3 of the motion embraces reasons 1 and 2; therefore, in upholding defendant’s position as to it, the defendant is sustained as to all three reasons.
Admittedly in the Amended Complaint the plaintiff’s steamship, the GULF-SPRAY, departed from…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- The Andros Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Panama Canal Company, and Empresa Nacional Del Petroleo, Empresa Nacional Del Petroleo v. Panama Canal CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- Victorias Milling Co., Inc., as Owners of the M/v Nonsuco v. Panama Canal CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
3Cited by3 opinions
- Gulf Oil Corporation v. Panama Canal CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1969
- Gulf Oil Corporation, as Owner Pro Hac Vice, of the Steamship Gulfspray, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross v. Panama Canal Company, Defendant-Appellee-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- Gulf Oil Corporation, as Owner, Pro Hac Vice, of the Steamship Gulfspray v. Panama Canal CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1971