You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Galt G/s v. Hapag-Lloyd Ag Can Transport Inc. Crystal Ice & Cold Storage Co. D & D Services, Defendants-Third-Party-Plaintiffs-Appellees v. Safeway Stores, Inc., Third-Party-Defendant-Appellant. Galt G/s v. Hapag-Lloyd Ag Can Transport Inc. Crystal Ice & Cold Storage Co. D & D Services Europe-North America Services v. Safeway Stores, Inc., Third-Party-Defendant-Appellee

Citations: 53 F.3d 961; 1995 A.M.C. 1755; 95 Daily Journal DAR 5090; 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2934; 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 9044Docket: 93-16521

Court: Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit; April 21, 1995; Federal Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Galt G/S initiated legal proceedings against Hapag-Lloyd AG, Can Transport Inc., Crystal Ice, Cold Storage Co., and D.D. Services, seeking damages stemming from a shipping dispute. The defendants attempted to bring Safeway Stores, Inc. into the case as a third-party defendant. The core legal issues revolved around the contractual obligations and liabilities of the entities involved in the shipping and storage operations. The appellate court was tasked with assessing these responsibilities and determining the extent to which each party was liable for the damages claimed by Galt G/S. Despite the case being argued in November 1994 and a decision reached in April 1995, the appellate court's opinion was ultimately withdrawn. This action suggested the court might reconsider its judgment or that additional proceedings were warranted to resolve outstanding issues. The related appeals were documented under case numbers 93-16521 and 93-16601.

Legal Issues Addressed

Liability under Shipping Contracts

Application: The appellate court examined the contractual obligations and liabilities of parties involved in the shipping and storage process.

Reasoning: The appellate court considered arguments from both sides, focusing on the liability and contractual obligations of the parties involved in the shipping and storage process.

Procedural Posture and Withdrawn Opinions

Application: The court withdrew its opinion, suggesting the possibility of reconsideration or further proceedings.

Reasoning: Ultimately, the opinion issued by the court has been withdrawn, indicating that the court may have either reconsidered its ruling or determined that further proceedings were necessary.