• United States v. Evridiki Navigation Inc.

    Publication Date: 2023-06-13
    Practice Area: Criminal Law
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping | Federal Government
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Phipps
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: 22-2032

    District court properly convicted shipping companies for falsification of environmental records where circumstantial evidence indicated that multiple crew members participated in the cover-up, indicating that it was done at least in part to serve corporate interests.

  • Zenith Energy Terminals Joliet Holdings LLC v. CenterPoint Props. Trust

    Publication Date: 2023-02-21
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping | Construction | Energy
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Davis
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Christopher Viceconte, Gibbons P.C., Wilmington, DE; Patrick J. Lamb, J’Aimee Crockett, ElevateNext Law, Chicago, IL for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: F. Troupe Mickler IV, Randal J. Teti, Ashby & Geddes, P.A., Wilmington, DE; James D. Dasso, Jennifer S. Park, and Mason D. Roberts, Foley & Lardner LLP, Chicago, IL for defendant.

    Case Number: N19C-10-054 EMD CCLD

    Court declined to enter summary judgment on breach of contract claim where the parties' evidence created genuine issues of material fact regarding whether defendant had used reasonable best efforts to complete the project.

  • Xcoal Energy & Res. v. Bluestone Energy Sales Corp.

    Publication Date: 2022-08-02
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping | Energy
    Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
    Judge: Judge Nygaard
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:

    Case Number: D69904

    District court did not err in finding contract susceptible to multiple reasonable interpretations and in relying on extrinsic evidence to interpret the contract as placing a performance obligation on one of the parties or ruling that said party breached the agreement by not performing that obligation.

  • Russell-Fowler v. GT Wilmington USA

    Publication Date: 2022-06-07
    Practice Area: Labor Law
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping | State and Local Government
    Court: Delaware Superior Court
    Judge: Judge Scott
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Sackena Russell-Fowler, Wilmington, DE, pro se appellant.
    for defendant: Lauren E.M. Russell, Young Conaway Stargatt & Taylor, LLP, Wilmington, Delaware; Victoria W. Counihan, Victoria E. Groff, Delaware Department of Justice, Wilmington, Delaware for appellees.

    Case Number: D69844

    Court reversed and remanded denial of unemployment benefits where division of unemployment insurance identified discrepancies in Pandemic Unemployment Assistance recipient's earnings, potentially rendering the board's decision in error as it was based on the incorrect standards.

  • Buckeye Partners, L.P. v. GT USA Wilmington, LLC

    Publication Date: 2022-04-12
    Practice Area: Contractual Disputes
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Laster
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jody C. Barillare, Amy M. Dudash, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael D. Blanchard, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Hartford, CT; Julie S. Goldemberg, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Philadelphia, PA; Leslie B. Spoltore, Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Nicholas Poduslenko, Matthew S. Olesh, Obermayer Rebmann Maxwell & Hippel LLP, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: Brian E. Farnan, Michael J. Farnan, Farnan LLP, Wilmington, DE; Thomas J. Elliott, Frederick P. Santarelli, Jack P. Elliott, Colin J. O’Boyle, Elliott Greenleaf, P.C., Blue Bell, PA for defendant.

    Case Number: D69774

    The court held that plaintiff who leased a dock from defendant proved that it was not a stevedore because it was not involved in the physical handling of cargo within the terminal property.

  • Law Journal Press | Digital Book

    Lancaster County & Berks County Court Rules 2024

    Authors:

    View this Book

    View more book results for the query "*"

  • Murphy Marine Serv., Inc. v. Dole Fresh Fruit Co.

    Publication Date: 2022-01-25
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping | Food and Beverage
    Court: U.S. District Court of Delaware
    Judge: District Judge Bibas
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Geoffrey G. Grivner, Andrew Hope, Craig Mills, Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney P.C., Wilmington, DE; George R. Zacharkow, Deasey, Mahoney & Valentini, LTD, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Frank P. DeGiulio, Kevin G. O’Donovan, Michael B. McCauley, Palmer, Biezup & Henderson, Wilmington, DE; Michael B. McCauley, Palmer, Biezup & Henderson, Wilmington, DE for defendants.

    Case Number: D69690

    The court held that plaintiff successfully pled a cause of action for promissory estoppel where it alleged defendant promised to pay the new tariff, that plaintiff relied on that promise, and that plaintiff suffered harm when Dole refused to pay. Motion to dismiss denied. However, plaintiff's claim for promissory fraud and punitive damages failed to state the mandatory requirements that defendant knew their statements about reimbursement were false and that defendant had a meritorious defense such that punitive damages were not applic

  • Pettry v. Smith

    Publication Date: 2021-07-21
    Practice Area: Corporate Governance
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Robert D. Goldberg, Biggs and Battaglia, Wilmington, DE; Brian J. Robbins, Stephen J. Oddo, Emily R. Bishop, Robbins LLP, San Diego, CA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Lisa A. Schmidt, Alexander M. Krischik, Nicole M. Henry, Richards, Layton & Finger, P.A., Wilmington, DE for individual defendants and nominal defendant FedEx Corp.

    Case Number: D69475

    The court dismissed this derivative action with prejudice, because plaintiff failed to adequately plead de-mand futility.

  • Simple Global, Inc. v. Banasik

    Publication Date: 2021-07-14
    Practice Area: Corporate Entities
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping | E-Commerce
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Fioravanti
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Thomas G. Macauley, Macauley LLC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Peter K. Schaeffer, Jr., Avenue Law, Dover, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: D69466

    A former director waited too long to challenge his removal, and the court concluded that the remaining shareholders had authority to remove him from his role as a director.

  • Murphy Marine Serv. of Delaware, Inc. v. GT USA Wilmington, LLC

    Publication Date: 2021-06-16
    Practice Area: Contracts
    Industry: Accounting | Cargo and Shipping | Investments and Investment Advisory
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Glasscock
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Michael P. Kelly, Daniel M. Silver, Travis J. Ferguson, McCarter & English, LLP, Wilmington, DE; Geoffrey G. Grivner, Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC, Wilmington, DE for plaintiffs.
    for defendant: David A. Dorey, Brandon W. McCune, Blank Rome LLP, Wilmington, DE for defendant.

    Case Number: D69436

    The parties' agreement provided for valuation as a going concern, and the court found that they impliedly agreed to a price based on the midpoint of a valuation range.

  • Pilot Air Freight, LLC v. Manna Freight Sys., Inc.

    Publication Date: 2020-10-07
    Practice Area: Mergers and Acquisitions
    Industry: Cargo and Shipping | Transportation
    Court: Court of Chancery
    Judge: Vice Chancellor Slights
    Attorneys: For plaintiff: Jody C. Barillare, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Wilmington, DE; Troy S. Brown, Margot G. Bloom, Brian F. Morris, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, Philadelphia, PA for plaintiff.
    for defendant: Kurt M. Heyman, Melissa N. Donimirski, Heyman Enerio Gattuso & Hirzel LLP, Wilmington, DE; Michael F. Cockson, Nathaniel J. Zulstra, Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP, Minneapolis, MN for defendants.

    Case Number: D69146

    Plaintiff failed to bring its claim for indemnification within the time period stated in the parties' contract, and it identified no gap to fill with respect to its good faith and fair dealing claim.