About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (July 2020 - August 2021)

handle is hein.ali/relwtrts0336 and id is 1 raw text is: TORTS Generally S.D.N.Y.2020. Cit. generally in disc. Customer brought an action pro se against, among others, common carrier, alleging that defendant's negligence caused a delay in the shipping of several vehicles, which forced plaintiff to travel to the port and pay monies to retrieve the vehicles and to pay for demurrage. This court converted defendant's motion to dismiss into a motion for summary judgment and granted it, holding that the bill of lading governing the parties' duties expressly stated that defendant was not liable for any damages caused by delays and that plaintiff was responsible for storage expenses. The court acknowledged with approval defendant's assertion that it did not owe plaintiff a duty under the Restatement Second of Torts for the delays and storage expenses, and noted that plaintiff also asserted other claims citing the Restatement of Torts that did not apply to the facts of this instant case. Ebomwonyi v. Sea Shipping Line, 473 F.Supp.3d 338, 344, 347. DIVISION ONE. INTENTIONAL HARMS TO PERSONS, LAND AND CHATTELS CHAPTER 7. INVASIONS OF THE INTEREST IN THE EXCLUSIVE POSSESSION OF LAND AND IN ITS PHYSICAL CONDITION (TRESPASS ON LAND) TOPIC 1. INTENTIONAL ENTRIES ON LAND § 158. Liability for Intentional Intrusions on Land C.A.6, 2021. Cit. in sup. After a state court entered judgment finding that limited-liability company was not entitled to eminent-domain payments from city because it was the lessee of real property and not the owner, limited-liability company sued city after taking ownership of the property, alleging that defendant violated the Fifth Amendment when it replaced a driveway on plaintiff's property with a defective one. The district court granted defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings, finding, among other things, that plaintiff lacked standing under Article III to bring suit, because it contracted away any protectable property interests under the terms of its lease with the preceding property owner. This court reversed in part and remanded, holding that the district court confused the merits of plaintiff's takings claim under the Fifth Amendment with the standards plaintiff had to fulfill to have standing to bring suit. The court explained that plaintiff satisfactorily alleged that it suffered a concrete injury for the purposes of Article III standing, because it alleged that defendant's purported conduct constituted an actionable trespass under Restatement of Torts § 158. CHKRS, LLC v. City of Dublin, 984 F.3d 483, 489. § 161. Failure to Remove a Thing Tortiously Placed on Land D.Md.2020. Com. (b) quot. in case quot. in sup. Owners of property in Pennsylvania sued neighbors who owned an adjacent property in Maryland, alleging, among other things, that defendants' driveway encroached on plaintiffs' land. This court granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on their COPYRIGHT ©2021 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most