Legal Opinion
Harthman v. Texaco Inc.
District Court, Virgin Islands
Decided December 20, 1995No. 1989-107; Civ. A. No. 1989-220PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
BROTMAN, District Judge,
Sitting by Designation.
Presently before this court is the Motion of Esso and Exxon For Summary Judgment as to All Claims Based on the PID Plaintiffs’ Assumption of the Risk.1 For the reasons set forth below, the court must deny this motion.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
Most of the underlying facts of this litigation were set forth in an Opinion dated August 13, 1993, published at 846 F.Supp. 1243 (D.V.I.1993) and supplemented in the Opin*1001ion of August 11, 1994, published at 157 F.R.D. 367 (D.V.I.1994). Familiarity with the underlying facts is therefore presumed.…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- In Re Paoli Railroad Yard Pcb LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1990
- Leroy D. Schoch v. First Fidelity Bancorporation and Industrial Valley Title Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1990
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Proctor v. North Shore Partners, Inc.District Court, Virgin Islands · 2002