Formosa Plastics Corp. v. Sturge

848 F.2d 390, 1988 A.M.C. 2999, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 8039
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided June 13, 1988·No. Nos. 1010, 1148, Dockets 88-7063, 88-7093·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Bernard Newman, J., of the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation, awarding damages of $581,595.56 to plaintiffs-appellees Formosa Plastics Corp. (U.S.A.) and Formosa Plastics Corp. (Taiwan) in an action for breach of a marine insurance policy.

Defendant-appellant Arthur Collwyn Sturge (Sturge) contends that the district court’s findings of fact concerning the damage to the shipments of ethylene dichloride during ocean carriage are clearly erroneous; we disagree. As to Sturge’s claim concerning the “Bailee Clause” of the marine insurance policy, we conclude that this claim is also without merit, substantially for the reasons set out in Judge Newman’s opinion below, 684 F.Supp. 359 (S.D. N.Y.1987).

We therefore affirm.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Formosa Plastics Corp. v. Sturge, 848 F.2d 390, 1988 A.M.C. 2999, 1988 U.S. App. LEXIS 8039 (2d Cir. 1988).

848 F.2d 390 (Formosa Plastics Corp. v. Sturge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Formosa Plastics Corporation v. Sturge
848 F.2d 390 (Second Circuit, 1988)