-
Case of the Day: SEI Societa Esplosivi Industriali v. L-3 Fuzing and Ordinance Systems
The case of the day is SEI Societa Esplosivi Industriali SpA v. L-3 Fuzing and Ordinance Systems, Inc. (D. Del. 2012). L-3 and SEI were defense contractors involved in a contract for fuzes for “aircraft-delivered attack munitions.” L-3 was to deliver electric components to SEI, but L-3’s electronics “presented a safety issue”: they allowed the…
-
Case of the Day: In re Application of Thai-Lao Lignite (Thailand) Co.
We reported on Thai-Lao Lignite (Thailand) Co. v. Government of the Lao People’s Democratic Republic (S.D.N.Y. 2011) back in August. In the prior case, the court confirmed an arbitral award in favor of Thai-Lao Lignite against the government of Laos. Today’s case of the day, In re Application of Thai-Lao Lignite (Thailand) Co. (D.D.C. 2011),…
-
Case of the Day: Asarco v. Xstrata
The case of the day is Asarco LLC v. Xstrata plc (D. Utah 2013). The claim was for contribution under CERCLA. According to Xstrata’s characterization of the return of service, which for unclear reasons is not publicly available via PACER: [t]he documents were served by posting them through the defendant company’s letterbox at the registered…
-
Case of the Day: Charleston Aluminum, LLC v. Energomex, S.A. de C.V.
I love today’s case of the day, Charleston Aluminum, LLC v. Energomex, S.A. de C.V. (D.S.C. 2013), because it deals with the rarely-construed Article 3 of the Hague Service Convention. Charleston Aluminum sued Energomex, a Mexican company; the facts of the case are not apparent from the decision. Charleston filed a “motion for Hague service,”…