Legal Opinion
Bamdad Mechanic Co. v. United Technologies Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided May 2, 1984No. Civ. A. 83-182 MMSPublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MURRAY M. SCHWARTZ, District Judge.
This contract dispute arose out of logistical difficulties generated by the 1978 revolution in Iran. The individual plaintiffs, Khosro Y. Jobrani and Parviz Jobrani, are both Iranian citizens who currently reside in California. The Jobrani brothers are the sole shareholders and directors of Bamdad Mechanic Co., Ltd. (“Bamdad”), an Iranian corporation and the corporate plaintiff in this action. Plaintiffs have named as defendants United Technologies Corp. (“UTC”) and two UTC subsidiaries, United Technologies International, Inc. and United Technologies…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Mellon Bank, N.A. v. Aetna Business Credit, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1980
- Landtect Corporation v. State Mutual Life Assurance Company of AmericaCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
- Van Sant v. American Express Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1948
- Hudson v. D & v. Mason Contractors, Inc.Superior Court of Delaware · 1969
- Monarch Industrial Corp. v. American Motorists InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1967
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Shell Oil Co.Supreme Court of Delaware · 1985
- Alliance Data Systems Corp. v. Blackstone Capital Partners v L.P.Court of Chancery of Delaware · 2009
- Atlantigas Corp. v. Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 2006
- Middletown Concrete Products, Inc. v. Black Clawson Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1992
- Bamdad Mechanic Co. v. United Technologies Corp.District Court, D. Delaware · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.