Dubois et al v. Maritimo Offshore PTY LTD et al
| Richard Dubois and Shelia Dubois |
| Maritimo Offshore PTY LTD, Maritimo USA, Edwin Fairbanks and Fairbanks Yacht Group, LLC |
| 3:2015cv01114 |
| July 21, 2015 |
| US District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| New Haven Office |
| Hartford |
| Jeffrey A. Meyer |
| Other Contract |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 2301 |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
231
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MARITIMO USA'S MOTION TO DISMISS. For the reasons stated in the attached opinion, the Court GRANTS Maritimo USA's motion to dismiss (Doc. # 201 ) insofar as the following counts of the complaint ar e dismissed, as pled against Maritimo USA, without prejudice, for lack of standing: Count One (breach of contract) in its entirety and Counts Four and Seven (breach of warranty) to the extent that these counts allege state law claims for breach of ex press or implied warranty and to the extent that these counts allege a claim for implied warranty under the Magnuson-Moss Act. Maritimo USA's motion to dismiss is otherwise DENIED without prejudice to renewal not inconsistent with the requirements set out in the attached opinion. Maritimo USA's letter motion for clarification (Doc. # 226 ) is DENIED as moot in light of this ruling. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 4/17/2020. (Webley, A)
|
|
Filing
188
ORDER RE PENDING MOTIONS. For the reasons stated in the attached opinion, the Court enters the following orders.1. The Court DISMISSES the following counts of the complaint without prejudice for lack of standing: Count One (breach of contract) in its entirety and Counts Four and Seven (breach of warranty) to the extent that these counts allege state law claims for breach of express or implied warranty and to the extent that these counts allege a claim for implied warranty under the Magnuson- Moss Act.2. The Court GRANTS the motion to dismiss of defendant Maritimo Australia (Doc. # 170 ) on the ground that this action by Flors is precluded by prior order of the Bankruptcy Court of the District of Connecticut. All claims against defend ant Maritimo Australia are dismissed.3. The Court GRANTS in part and DENIES in part the motion to dismiss of the Fairbanks defendants (Doc. # 102 ). To the extent that plaintiff Flors has standing to maintain any warranty claim, the Court GRANTS the motion as to any breach of express warranty claim alleged in Count Seven. The Court otherwise DENIES the motion as to the misrepresentation claim alleged in Count Two (alleged against Edwin Fairbanks only), the negligence claim alleged in Count F ive (alleged against Edwin Fairbanks only), and the CUTPA claim alleged in Count Eight (alleged against both Fairbanks defendants).4. The Court DENIES as moot the motion of defendant Maritimo Australia to dismiss the cross-claims by the Fairbanks defendants (Doc. # 95 ) in light of these parties stipulation of dismissal of these claims without prejudice.5.The Court GRANTS the Fairbanks defendants motion for attorneys fees (Doc. # 178 ) in the amount of $3,207.10 to be paid to the Fairbanks defendants counsel by plaintiff Flors no later than October 17, 2019. It is so ordered. Signed by Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer on 9/26/2019.(Webley, A)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
