green
Positive treatment
6.5 score
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1987
2006
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Henley v. Marine Transportion
(2×)
Co. v. M/V Nedlloyd, 817 F.2d 1022 , 1029 _________________ ____________ (2d Cir. 1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1011 (1988); Cincinnati _____ ______ __________ Milacron, Ltd. v. M/V American Legend, 804 F.2d 837, 837 (4th ______________ ____________________ Cir. 1986) (en banc) (per curiam), rev'g 784 F.2d 1161 (4th Cir. _____ 1986); Brown & Root, Inc. v. M/V Peisander, 648 F.2d 415 , 424 ___________________ _____________ (5th Cir. 1981).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Henley v. Marine Transportion
(2×)
Co. v. MV Nedlloyd, 817 F.2d 1022, 1029 (2d Cir.1987), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 1011 , 108 S.Ct. 710 , 98 L.Ed.2d 661 (1988); Cincinnati Milacron, Ltd. v. M/V American Legend, 804 F.2d 837, 837 (4th Cir.1986) (en banc) (per curiam), rev’g 784 F.2d 1161 (4th Cir.1986); Brown & Root, Inc. v. M/V Peisander, 648 F.2d 415, 424 (5th Cir.1981).
discussed
Cited "see"
Granite State Insurance v. M/V Caraibe
See Cincinnati Milacron, Ltd. v. M/V American Legend, 804 F.2d 837 (4th Cir.1986) (en banc). . "[W]e have firmly established the position in [Brown & Root, Inc.} that the option need not be included on the face of the bill of lading....
cited
Cited "see"
Pearson v. Black King Shipping Co., Ltd.
See Cincinnati Milacron, 804 F.2d at 837 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Insurance Company Of North America v. M/V Ocean Lynx
See Cincinnati Milacron, Ltd. v. M/V American Legend, 784 F.2d 1161, 1166 (4th Cir.) (Phillips, J., dissenting), rev'd, 804 F.2d 837 (4th Cir.1986) (en banc court reversed panel opinion on the basis of dissent of Phillips, J.); Carman Tool & Abrasives, Inc. v. Evergreen Lines, 871 F.2d 897 , 900 n. 6 (9th Cir.1989); Aetna Ins.
discussed
Cited "see"
Insurance Co. of North America v. M/V Ocean Lynx
See Cincinnati Milacron, Ltd. v. M/V American Legend, 784 F.2d 1161, 1166 (4th Cir.) (Phillips, J., dissenting), rev’d, 804 F.2d 837 (4th Cir.1986) (en banc court reversed panel opinion on the basis of dissent of Phillips, J.); Carman Tool & Abrasives, Inc. v. Evergreen Lines, 871 F.2d 897 , 900 n. 6 (9th Cir.1989); Aetna Ins.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Delphi-Delco Electronics Systems v. M/V NEDLLOYD EUROPA
Law § 10-35, 166 (“According to the majority view the fair opportunity requirement is satisfied when a bill refers to a bill of lading and tariff on file with the Federal Maritime Commission.”); see also Cincinnati Milacron, Ltd. v. M/V American Legend, 804 F.2d 837 (4th Cir.1986) (per curiam) (sitting en banc, reversing earlier panel decision holding that fair opportunity doctrine could not be met through terms incorporated in a short form bill of lading; cited, although on another point, in General Elec.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Carman Tool & Abrasives, Inc. v. Evergreen Lines
Compare Pan Am, 559 F.2d at 1177 (rejecting argument that "an experienced shipper should be deemed to have knowledge of an opportunity to secure an alternative freight rate, and higher carrier liability, by reason of his knowledge of COGSA") with Cincinnati Milacron, Ltd. v. M/V American Legend, 784 F.2d 1161, 1166 (4th Cir.) (Phillips, J., dissenting) ("it does not seem unduly burdensome to impute to shippers knowledge of all of [COGSA's] terms" as incorporated by reference in a short form bill of lading), rev'd en banc, 804 F.2d 837 (4th Cir.1986) (adopting Judge Phillips' dissent).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Carman Tool & Abrasives, Inc. v. Evergreen Lines
Compare Pan Am, 559 F.2d at 1177 (rejecting argument that "an experienced shipper should be deemed to have knowledge of an opportunity to secure an alternative freight rate, and higher carrier liability, by reason of his knowledge of COGSA”) with Cincinnati Milacron, Ltd. v. M/V American Legend, 784 F.2d 1161, 1166 (4th Cir.) (Phillips, J„ dissenting) ("it does not seem unduly burdensome to impute to shippers knowledge of all of [COG-SA's] terms” as incorporated by reference in a short form bill of lading), rev'd en banc, 804 F.2d 837 (4th Cir.1986) (adopting Judge Phillips’ dissent).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
CINCINNATI MILACRON, LTD., Appellant,
v.
M/V AMERICAN LEGEND, Her Engines, Boilers, Etc., and United States Lines, Inc., Appellees
v.
M/V AMERICAN LEGEND, Her Engines, Boilers, Etc., and United States Lines, Inc., Appellees
85-1183.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Nov 6, 1986.
James D. Skeen (David W. Skeen, Constable, Alexander, Daneker & Skeen, on brief), for appellant., John H. West, III (Roann Nichols, Ober, Kaler, Grimes & Shriver, on brief), for appellees.
Winter, Russell, Widener, Hall, Phillips, Sprouse, Ervin, Chapman, Wilkinson, Wilkins.
Cited by 23 opinions | Published
PER CURIAM:
On rehearing of this appeal en banc, the judgment of the district court is affirmed for reasons stated in the dissent to the superseded panel decision. See Cincinnati Milacron, Ltd. v. M/V American Legend, 784 F.2d 1161, 1166 (4th Cir.1986) (dissenting opinion).
Chief Judge Winter and Judge Ervin dissent and would reverse for reasons stated in the superseded opinion for the panel majority. See id. at 1162.
AFFIRMED.