Legal Opinion

Barman v. Union Oil Co.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided September 26, 2002No. 01-35497, 01-35615; D.C. No. CV-97-00563-ASPublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM *

This diversity action arises out of Plaintiff Robert Barman’s efforts to buy four gasoline stations from Defendant Union Oil Company of California (Unocal) and to become a marketer of Unocal-branded gasoline. Plaintiff alleges that the parties entered into a Real Property/Marketer Agreement (Agreement) for those purposes, but that Unocal breached that Agreement. He also alleges tort and contract claims and violations of the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act (PMPA) arising from Unocal’s sale of its interests in Oregon to Defendant Tosco Corporation (Tosco). A jury assessed…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Yogman v. ParrottOregon Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Best v. United States National BankOregon Supreme Court · 1987
  3. United States National Bank v. BogeOregon Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Schafer v. Fraser Et UxOregon Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Unocal Corp. v. KaabipourCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1999

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Santiago-Sepúlveda v. Esso Standard Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2011

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API