Legal Opinion
A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S v. Safewater Lines (1) Pvt, Ltd.
District Court, S.D. Texas
Decided August 23, 2017No. Civ. A. H-13-1726Published
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Admiralty—Rule 9(h)
MELINDA HARMON, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
Pending before the Court, in the above referenced action in admiralty, is a motion for summary judgment (# 67) under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 56,. filed by *702Plaintiff A.P. Moller-Maersk A/S, Trading as Maersk Line (“Maersk”), based on its contract claims against Defendant Samrat Container Lines, Inc. (“Samrat”). Currently this lawsuit, grounded in admiralty (28 U.S.C. § 1333(1)) and/or diversity (28 U.S.C. § 1332(a)(2)) jurisdiction over Maersk, a Danish corporation, and Samrat, a New…
2Cases cited44 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
- Lujan v. National Wildlife FederationSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Turner v. Baylor Richardson Medical CenterCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2007
39 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.