Joseph Malomo Ajibola, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Sabena Belgium Airline, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, 108 F.3d 1369 (2d Cir. 1997). · Go Syfert
Search
Joseph Malomo Ajibola, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee v. Sabena Belgium Airline, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant, 108 F.3d 1369 (2d Cir. 1997). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“when a new agreement merely modifies an earlier agreement, any provisions of the earlier agreement that are consistent with the modified version will survive”
68 citation events (33 in the last 25 years) across 16 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. Agnello (nyed, 2004-10-29)
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997 2011 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) United States v. Agnello
E.D.N.Y · 2004 · signal: accord · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
when a new agreement merely modifies an earlier agreement, any provisions of the earlier agreement that are consistent with the modified version will survive
cited Cited "see" Harvin v. Cheney
D. Conn. · 2024 · signal: see · confidence high
See Blum v. Schlegel, 108 F.3d 1369 (2d Cir. 1997) (unpublished).
discussed Cited "see" First Technology Capital, Inc. v. Airborne, Inc.
W.D.N.Y. · 2017 · signal: see · confidence high
Austrian Airlines Oesterreichische Luftverkehrs AG, 567 F.Supp.2d at 592 (applying Article 2 of the UCC to the sale of an aircraft); see Coastal Aviation, Inc. v. Commander Aircraft Co., 937 F.Supp. 1051, 1060 (S.D.N.Y. 1996) (same), aff'd, 108 F.3d 1369 (2d Cir. 1997).
cited Cited "see" Excellus Health Plan, Inc. v. Tran
W.D.N.Y. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See generally Blum v. Schlegel, 1996 WL 925921 (W.D.N.Y.1996), aff'd, 108 F.3d 1369 (2d Cir.1997).
cited Cited "see" Bliss v. Rochester City School District
W.D.N.Y. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Coggins v. 297 Lenox Realty Co., 108 F.3d 1369 , 1997 WL 138781 (2d Cir.1997) (unpublished opinion); Bugg v. International Union of Allied Indus.
cited Cited "see" Air Support International, Inc. v. Atlas Air, Inc.
E.D.N.Y · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Coastal Aviation, Inc. v. Commander Aircraft Co., 937 F.Supp. 1051, 1060 (S.D.N.Y.1996), aff'd 108 F.3d 1369 (2d Cir.1997).
cited Cited "see" Kreiss v. McCown De Leeuw & Co.
S.D.N.Y. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Coastal Aviation, Inc. v. Commander Aircraft Co., 937 F.Supp. 1051, 1060 (S.D.N.Y.1996), aff'd 108 F.3d 1369 (2d Cir.1997).
discussed Cited "see" Canusa Corp. v. a & R LOBOSCO, INC.
E.D.N.Y · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
See Coastal Aviation, Inc. v. Commander Aircraft Co., 937 F.Supp. 1051, 1063 (S.D.N.Y.1996) (citing cases), aff'd 108 F.3d 1369 , 1997 WL 138112 (2d Cir.1997); Bende & Sons, Inc. v. Crown Recreation, Inc., Kiffe Prods.
discussed Cited "see" David Rogath, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee. v. Werner E.R. Siebenmann, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant
2d Cir. · 1997 · signal: see · confidence high
In that situation, unless the buyer expressly preserves his rights under the warranties ..., we think the buyer has waived the breach.” Galli v. Metz, 973 F.2d 145, 151 (2d Cir.1992) (emphasis added); see In re Chateaugay Corp., 155 B.R. 636, 650-51 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.1993), aff'd, 108 F.3d 1369 (2d Cir.1997).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Callahan v. United States
S.D.N.Y. · 2004 · signal: see also · confidence low
Furthermore, because subject matter jurisdiction involves the Court’s power to decide the case, in considering a 12(b)(1) motion for dismissal based on lack of subject matter jurisdiction, courts “need not accept as *407 true contested jurisdictional allegations and may resolve disputed jurisdictional facts by reference to affidavits and other material outside the pleadings.” Id.; see also Dillard v. Runyon, 928 F.Supp. 1316, 1322 (S.D.N.Y.1996), aff’d mem., 108 F.3d 1369 , 1997 WL 138691 (2d Cir.1997). b.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Jedrejcic v. Croatian Olympic Committee
E.D.N.Y · 1999 · signal: see also · confidence low
See, e.g., Raphael v. 18 Restaurant, Inc., 954 F.Supp. 549, 552 (E.D.N.Y.1996) (indicating hearings normally required to determine subject matter jurisdiction when “court does not have sufficient information before it to determine the principal place of business of each defendant ...”); see also Dillard v. Runyon, 928 F.Supp. 1316, 1321-22 (S.D.N.Y.1996), affd, 108 F.3d 1369 , 1997 WL 138691 (2d Cir.1997); Ferrara Bakery & Café, Inc. v. Colavita Pasta & Olive Oil Corp., No. 98 Civ. 4344, 1999 WL 135234 at *3, 1999 U.S. Dist.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Marks v. New York University
S.D.N.Y. · 1999 · signal: see also · confidence low
Bell & Assocs., Inc. v. Lloyd’s Underwriters, 827 F.Supp. 985, 988 (S.D.N.Y.1993); see also, e.g., Coastal Aviation, Inc. v. Commander Aircraft Co., 937 F.Supp. 1051, 1060 (S.D.N.Y.1996), aff'd, 108 F.3d 1369 (2d Cir.1997).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Joseph Malomo Ajibola, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee
v.
Sabena Belgium Airline, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant
96-7974.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
Mar 25, 1997.
108 F.3d 1369
Unpublished
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 85%
Citer courts: E.D. New York (1)

108 F.3d 1369

NOTICE: THIS SUMMARY ORDER MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENTIAL AUTHORITY, BUT MAY BE CALLED TO THE ATTENTION OF THE COURT IN A SUBSEQUENT STAGE OF THIS CASE, IN A RELATED CASE, OR IN ANY CASE FOR PURPOSES OF COLLATERAL ESTOPPEL OR RES JUDICATA. SEE SECOND CIRCUIT RULE 0.23.
Joseph Malomo AJIBOLA, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross-Appellee,
v.
SABENA BELGIUM AIRLINE, Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant.

Nos. 96-7974(L), 96-9007.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

March 25, 1997.

Appearing for Appellant: Joseph Malomo Ajibola, pro se, Brooklyn, New York.

Appearing for Appellee: Peter D. Fenzel, New York, New York.

Before FEINBERG, CARDAMONE and WINTER, Circuit Judges.

1

This cause came on to be heard on the transcript of record from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and was argued.

2

ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court is hereby affirmed and the cross-appeal is dismissed as moot.

3

Joseph Malomo Ajibola, pro se, appeals from Judge Haight's grant of summary judgment to Sabena Belgium Airlines ("Sabena") in Ajibola's action seeking damages for breach of contract. Sabena cross-appeals from Judge Haight's denial of its motion for summary judgment on the issue of limited liability under the Warsaw Convention.

4

On Ajibola's appeal, we affirm for substantially the reasons stated by the district court. See Ajibola v. Sabena Belgium Airline, 95 Civ. 2479(CSH), 1996 WL 383133 (S.D.N.Y. July 9, 1996).

5

On appeal, Ajibola further argues that Sabena's role was not to import the hats, but only to transport them to the United States and that therefore the contract was not illegal. Ajibola is mistaken. Sabena was contracted to carry the hats from Nigeria to the United States, which is clearly an act of importation. See, e.g., Cunard Steamship Co. v. Mellon, 262 U.S. 100, 122 (1923) (importation "consists in bringing an article into a country from the outside.... Entry through a custom house is not of the essence of the act."); United States v.1903 Obscene Magazines, 907 F.2d 1338, 1341 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 984 (1990).

6

Ajibola also makes numerous unsupported allegations on appeal. We see no reason to consider issues raised for the first time on appeal, see, e.g., Singleton v. Wulff, 428 U.S. 106, 120-21 (1976); Rodick v. City of Schenectady, 1 F.3d 1341, 1347 (2d Cir.1993), and Ajibola's assertions are in any event unsupported by any evidence.

7

We therefore affirm and dismiss Sabena's cross-appeal as moot.