Legal Opinion
General Electric Co. v. M/V Gediz
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided August 4, 1989No. 88 Civ. 4386 (KTD)PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KEVIN THOMAS DUFFY, District Judge.
Plaintiff General Electric Company brings this action under the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act (“COGSA”), 46 U.S.C. App. §§ 1300-1315 (1982 & Supp. V 1987) regarding cargo allegedly damaged while being shipped by defendant Turkish Cargo Lines (“Turkish Cargo”). Turkish Cargo moves pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 for summary judgment, claiming that the one- year statute of limitations under COGSA bars General Electric’s damages claim. General Electric argues that Turkish Cargo is estopped by its own conduct from raising the statute of limitations defense.
Purs…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- United Fruit Company v. J. A. Folger & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc. v. Cunard Steamship LimitedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1973
- Volvo v. M/V ATLANTIC SAGADistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1982
3Cited by5 opinions
- Mikinberg v. Baltic Steamship Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
- Bunge Edible Oil Corp. v. M/V TORM RASKDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1991
- Malgor & Co. v. Compañía Trasatlántica Española, S.A.District Court, D. Puerto Rico · 1996
- Old Toledo Brands, Inc. v. Schenker, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2008
- Motel Mikinberg v. Baltic Steamship Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993