Legal Opinion
Consolidated Rail Corp. v. M/T HOEGH FORUM
District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
Decided December 11, 1985No. Civ. A. 85-0226PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM and ORDER
SHAPIRO, District Judge.
Plaintiff Consolidated Rail Corporation (“Conrail”) claims that it has suffered approximately $24,503.70 in economic losses because the defendant ship M/T Hoegh Forum (the “vessel”) was berthed without its consent from September 24-26, 1984 at Pier 124, South Wharves, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (“Pier 124 or the “pier”), a pier owned by Conrail. Defendants Leif Hoegh & Co., S/A (“Leif Hoegh”) (the owner and operator of the M/T Hoegh Forum) and Petrolsea Inc. of Monrovia (“Petrol-sea”) have each moved for summary judgment and/or judgment on the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Fireman's Insurance Company of Newark, New Jersey v. Raymond DufresneCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1982
- Robins Dry Dock & Repair Co. v. FlintSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Federal Commerce & Navigation Company, Ltd. v. The M/v Marathonian, Her Engines, Etc. And Europa Shipping CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1976
- Larry v. Penn Truck Aids, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1982
- Lewis F. Stevens and Elvira B. Stevens v. F/v Bonnie Doon, Her Engines, MacHinery Tackle, Etc. Gene Koblick, an IndividualCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Reserve Mooring Inc. v. American Commercial Barge Line, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2001
- Furness Withy (Chartering), Inc., Panama v. World Energy Systems Associates, Inc., Wesa, Inc., Hemmert Shipping Corporation and Texas Chartering, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1988