Legal Opinion
Martin Marietta Corporation v. International Telecommunications Satellite Organization
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Decided October 21, 1992No. 92-1094PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ERVIN, Chief Judge:
Martin Marietta agreed to launch a satellite for the International Telecommunications Satellite Organization (INTELSAT), but the satellite ended up in a useless orbit. Martin Marietta then sought a declaratory judgment that it owed INTELSAT nothing under the agreement between the parties, and INTELSAT counterclaimed for negligence, negligent misrepresentation, gross negligence, and breach of contract. Martin Marietta moved to dismiss INTELSAT's counterclaims for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6),…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Jenkins v. McKeithenSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Martens Chevrolet, Inc. v. SeneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1982
- Maryland-National Capital Park & Planning Commission v. Washington National ArenaCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1978
- Weisman v. ConnorsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1988
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- The Estate Construction Company v. Miller & Smith Holding Company, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
- Horlick v. Capital Women's Care, LLCDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2011
- Seabury Management, Inc. v. Professional Golfers' Ass'n of America, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 1994
- Ziemkiewicz v. R + L Carriers, Inc.District Court, D. Maryland · 2014
- Estate Construction Co. v. Miller & Smith Holding Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.