Legal Opinion
Massman Construction Co. v. Sioux City & New Orleans Barge Lines, Inc.
District Court, W.D. Missouri
Decided January 15, 1979No. 20418-1PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION, FINDINGS OF FACT, AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
OLIVER, Chief Judge.
This admiralty case was originally commenced by Massman Construction Company. At the outset of the trial, by agreement of counsel, Triad Equipment Co., Inc., was added as a party plaintiff. (Tr. 5). After taking evidence for several days, the parties further agreed to the entrance of an order pursuant to Rule 42(b), F.R.Civ.P., separating the issue of liability from damage and establishing a schedule for the submission of post-trial briefs, proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. The case therefore…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Stevens v. the White CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- The Steamer WebbSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Mid-America Transportation Company, Inc. v. National Marine Service, Inc., and M/v National Progress, Her Engines,boilers, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1974
- The Edmund L. LevyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1904
- The L. P. DaytonSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Consolidated Grain & Barge Company v. Marcona Conveyor Corporation, Marcona Sales, Inc. v. Consolidated Grain & Barge CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- Pillsbury Co. v. Midland Enterprises, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1989
- Antonio Dimillo v. Sheepscot Pilots, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- Riverway Co. v. Spivey Marine & Harbor Service Co.District Court, S.D. Illinois · 1984
- CONSOL. GRAIN & BARGE CO. v. Wisconsin Barge LineDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1981
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.