Legal Opinion

Commonwealth Utilities Corp. v. Goltens Trading & Engineering PTE Ltd.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided December 16, 2002No. 01-16614PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ALARCÓN, Circuit Judge:

Third-Party-Plaintiff-Appellant, In-Place Machining Company, Inc. (“IPM”), appeals from the district court’s order for summary judgment dismissing IPM’s claim for contribution from Third-Party-Defendant-Appellee, MAN B & W Diesel AG (“MAN”). The dispute arises from the failure of a large diesel generator, owned and operated by Commonwealth Utilities Corporation (“CUC”), shortly after the generator had received parts and undergone repairs by Goltens Trading & Engineering PTE LTD. (“Goltens”) and IPM. CUC filed claims against Goltens for breach of warranty and…

2Cases cited14 opinions

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
First Nat. Bank of Ariz. v. Cities Service Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1968
Gasperini v. Center for Humanities, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1996
Lehman Brothers v. ScheinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

Commonwealth Utilities Corporation v. Goltens Trading & Engineering Pte Ltd., a Foreign Corporation, and In-Place MacHining Company, Inc., a Foreign Corporation, Defendant-Third-Party-Plaintiff-Appellant v. Man B & W Diesel Ag, Third-Party-Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2002