A.P. Moller - Maersk A/S, trading as Maersk Line v. Safewater Lines (I) Pvt., Ltd. et al
Plaintiff: A.P. Moller - Maersk A/S, trading as Maersk Line
Defendant: Safewater Lines (I) Pvt., Ltd., SAMRAT Container Lines, Inc. and ATNI, Inc.
Case Number: 4:2013cv01726
Filed: June 13, 2013
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of Texas
Office: Houston Office
County: Harris
Presiding Judge: Melinda Harmon
Nature of Suit: Contract: Marine
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 1333 Admiralty
Jury Demanded By: Defendant

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
August 23, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 87 OPINION AND ORDER OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT. The Court agrees that Maersk is entitled to summary judgment against Defendant Samrat on its breach of contract and contractual indemnity claims. As with Maersk's claims for all loss, damage, delay, fines and other expenses, Samrat is jointly and severally liable for Maersk's attorneys' fees. The Court Orders Maersk to file an appropriate motion for attorneys' fees under the bill of lading within twenty days with supporting evidence. Samrat shall file a timely response. The Court also ORDERS Maersk to file a proposed final judgment at the same time.(Signed by Judge Melinda Harmon) Parties notified.(rhawkins)
January 31, 2017 Opinion or Order Filing 84 OPINION AND ORDER. The Court ORDERS that Samrat's objections 54 to Maersk's voluntary dismissal of Safewater I and Safewater are OVERRULED and Maersk's claims against Safewater I and Safewater are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Maersk's notice of voluntary dismissal under Rule 41(a)(1)(I); that Defendant and Cross-Claimant Samrat's Federal Rule 55(a)'s request for entry of default against Cross-Claim Defendants Safewater I and Safewater 57 and corrected motion to strike 60 , which superseded 59 ) are DENIED; and that Samrat's motion to consolidate 65 this case with H-16-1565 is DENIED. (Signed by Judge Melinda Harmon) Parties notified.(rhawkins)
Access additional case information on PACER

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 Texas Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: A.P. Moller - Maersk A/S, trading as Maersk Line v. Safewater Lines (I) Pvt., Ltd. et al
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Plaintiff: A.P. Moller - Maersk A/S, trading as Maersk Line
Represented By: Richard Lee Gorman
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: Safewater Lines (I) Pvt., Ltd.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: SAMRAT Container Lines, Inc.
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]
Defendant: ATNI, Inc.
Represented By: Robert M Bowick, Jr
Represented By: John Wesley Raley, III
Search News [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ]
Search Finance [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ]

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.


Why Is My Information Online?