CITGO Asphalt Refining Company v. Frescati Shipping Company

Petition for certiorari denied on February 24, 2014
Docket No. Op. Below Argument Opinion Vote Author Term
13-462 3d Cir. N/A N/A N/A N/A OT 2013

Issue: (1) Whether a safe berth provision in a voyage charter contract is a guarantee of the safety of the berth, rather than a duty of due diligence, and whether such a contractual provision runs to the benefit of a third-party vessel owner when there is no evidence of the contracting parties’ intent to benefit the vessel owner; and (2) whether a wharf owner’s tort duty to provide a safe approach extends to routes selected exclusively by a vessel’s navigators in federally maintained waters over which the wharf owner does not exercise dominion or control.

DateProceedings and Orders (key to color coding)
Oct 10 2013Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 14, 2013)
Oct 16 2013Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner CITCO.
Nov 5 2013Order extending time to file response to petition to and including December 16, 2013, for all respondents.
Nov 8 2013Brief amici curiae of South Jersey Port Corporation, et al. filed.
Nov 8 2013Brief amicus curiae of Plains Products Terminals LLC filed.
Dec 10 2013Order further extending time to file response to petition to and including January 15, 2014, for all respondents.
Jan 15 2014Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
Jan 15 2014Brief of respondents Frescati Shipping Company, Ltd., et al. in opposition filed.
Jan 17 2014Additional authorities received from counsel for respondents Frescati Shipping Company, Ltd., et al..
Jan 28 2014Reply of petitioners CITGO Asphalt Refining Company, et al. filed. (Distributed)
Jan 29 2014DISTRIBUTED for Conference of February 21, 2014.
Feb 24 2014Petition DENIED.
 
Share:
Term Snapshot
At a Glance
Awards