Legal Opinion

Maritima Petroleo E Engenharia LTDA v. Ocean Rig 1 As

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided October 6, 1999No. 99 Civ. 8678(SAS)PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

SCHEINDLIN, District Judge.

Defendants, Ocean Rig 1 AS and Ocean Rig 2 AS (hereinafter “Ocean Rig” or “defendants”), move pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. Rules 12(b)(1) and (6) to dismiss the complaint and to vacate the maritime attachment brought by plaintiff Marítima Petró-leo E Engenharia LTDA (hereinafter “Marítima” or “plaintiff’) on the grounds that: (1) there is no admiralty jurisdiction; (2) the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; (3) plaintiff has abused the attachment process; and (4) plaintiff has no need for security. Because this Court…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Jerome B. Grubart, Inc. v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1995
  2. American Dredging Co. v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  3. Kossick v. United Fruit Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
  4. Foremost Insurance v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Sisson v. RubySupreme Court of the United States · 1990

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Dolco Investments, Ltd. v. Moonriver Development, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 2007
  2. Red River Holdings, LLC v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
  3. Smith v. MitlofDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2002
  4. Sea Transport Contractors, Ltd. v. Industries Chemiques Du SenegalDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
  5. EFKO Food Ingredients Ltd. v. Pacific Inter-Link SDN BHDDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2008

10 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