Cases

WESLEY, Circuit Judge: This action presents, as the District Court aptly put it, “interesting and apparently novel questions regarding the interplay among the United States bankruptcy law, maritime law and the federal inter-pleader statutes.” UPT Pool Ltd. v. Dynamic Oil Trading (Sing.) PTE., Ltd., Nos. 14-CV-9262 (VEC) et al., 2015 WL 4005527, at *1 (S.D.N.Y.

732 A.2d 1236 (1999) ROHM AND HAAS COMPANY and Rohm and Haas Delaware Valley, Inc. and Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources, Appellees, v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY; International Insurance Company; Aetna Casualty & Surety Company; AIU Insurance Company; Allianz Underwriters Insurance Company; Allstate Insurance Company (As Successor to Northbrook Excess and Surplus Company, formerly known as Northbrook Insurance Company Casu

OPINION OF THE COURT A. LEON HIGGINBOTHAM, Jr., Circuit Judge. This unfortunate appeal is again before us for resolution due to the parties’ inabili*252ty to reach a prompt settlement of their dispute. We must decide whether the district court erred in finding that it lacked jurisdiction to allocate settlement proceeds among the plaintiffs in the u

49 F.Supp.2d 750 (1999) BIOVAIL CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL, Plaintiff, v. Hoechst AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc., Hoechst Marion Roussel North America, Inc., Carderm Capital L.P., Horst Waesche, Daniel Camus, Richard J. Markham, Peter W. Ladell, Gerald P. Belle, and Jurgen Dormann, Defendants. No. Civ.A. 98-1434(MTB). United States District Court, D. New Jersey.

PATRICK E. HIGGINBOTHAM, Circuit Judge: I In April 1981, a number of independent Texas school districts sued National Gypsum Company, complaining of asbestos installed in approximately 600 school buildings located throughout the state of Texas. The School Districts sought recovery of $175 million and punitive damages of three times that amount for the costs of containing or replacing the asbestos materials a

SPROUSE, Circuit Judge: Metrix Warehouse, Inc., (Metrix) brought the underlying action in this case against Mercedes-Benz of North America (MBNA) *1035under Section 1 of the Sherman Act.1 MBNA filed a counterclaim grounded on Section 2(c) of the Robinson-Patman Act.2 This is an interlocutory appeal from thre

821 F.Supp. 802 (1993) CARIBE BMW, INC., Plaintiff, v. BAYERISCHE MOTOREN WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT and BMW of North America, Inc., Defendants. Civ. No. 91-1156 (RLA). United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico. May 13, 1993. *803 *804 *805 Enrique J. Mend

470 F.Supp. 966 (1979) OLYMPIA WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, Plaintiff, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 77-0069-R. United States District Court, W. D. Virginia. April 4, 1979. Harwell M. Darby, Eggleston & Glenn, Roanoke, Va., for plaintiff. William B. Poff, Law Offices, Woods, Rogers, Muse, Walker & Thornton, Roanoke, Va., for defenda

988 F.2d 104 Dimitrios Th. VAGENAS, Spyridon Th. Vagenas, ChrysostomosTh. Vagenas, and Constantinos Th. Vagenas,Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.CONTINENTAL GIN COMPANY; Continental Eagle Corporation, andAllied Products Corporation, Defendants-Appellees. No. 92-6387. United States Court of Appeals,Eleventh Circuit. April 9, 1993.

FAY, Circuit Judge: This is an action by four Greek brothers to enforce a judgment entered by a Greek court against a contractor. The district court, upon a motion for judgment on the pleadings, held the action barred by a two year statute of limitations under the Alabama Code, and from this order the Greek brothers appeal. For the reasons that follow, we VACATE and REMAND for further proceedings because the district court s

545 F.Supp. 598 (1982) OLYMPIA WERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, Plaintiff, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, Defendant. Civ. A. No. 77-0069-R. United States District Court, W. D. Virginia, Roanoke Division. May 26, 1982. *599 Harwell M. Darby, Eggleston & Glenn, Roanoke, Va., Spencer & Kaye, Washington, D. C., for plaintiff. E

804 F.2d 250 5 Fed.R.Serv.3d 1196 LASKY, Harvey, Guardian ad litem Lasky, Jesse I. and JamieNovember, husband and wife, individually, and asparents and natural guardians of theirminor son, Gregory Laskyv.CONTINENTAL PRODUCTS CORPORATION Continental Gummi-Werke,Aktiengesellschaft Nissan Motor Corporation InUSA, Nissan Motor Corporation Limited (Japan).Appeal of Jamie November LASKY, indivi

810 F.Supp. 1520 (1992) CONTINENTAL TREND RESOURCES, INC.; Harold G. Hamm, Trustee of the Harold G. Hamm Revocable Inter Vivos Trust; Gary H. Wright; Cindy Wright; Jeffery B. Hume; and Farrar Oil Company, Plaintiffs, v. OXY USA, INC. and Williams Natural Gas Company, Defendants. No. CIV-90-1006-A. United States District Court, W.D. Oklahoma. October 20, 1992.

569 F.Supp. 1227 (1983) Jesse I. and Jamie November LASKY, h/w et al. v. CONTINENTAL PRODUCTS CORPORATION, et al. Civ. A. No. 82-3415. United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. July 20, 1983. William Zurzolo, Philadelphia, Pa., for plaintiffs. George J. Lavin, Jr., Philadelphia, Pa., for Nissan. *1228 Neil Jo

938 F.2d 769 20 Fed.R.Serv.3d 188 Robert E. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.William E. LEACH, Star Number 2369, individually and in hisofficial capacity as an Illinois State Police Officer,Officer John Doe, individually and in his official capacityas an Illinois State Police Officer, Officer James Doe,individually and in his official capacity as an IllinoisState Police Officer, Defendants-App

MANION, Circuit Judge. Robert Williams appeals the dismissal of his civil rights and tort action against defendant William Leach, a Sergeant with the Illinois Department of State Police. The district court dismissed Williams’ suit because his counsel had failed to perfect service of process on Leach within the statutorily designated time period. Also, the district court noted that by the time Williams had filed his complaint,

896 F.2d 865 58 USLW 2576, 59 Ed. Law Rep. 599 W.R. GRACE & COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee,v.CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Gerling Konzern AllegmeineVersicherungs-Aktiengesellschaft, Granite State InsuranceCo., Guarantee Insurance Co., Hartford Accident andIndemnity Co., et al., Defendants-Appellants. Nos. 88-2902, 88-6164. United States Court of Ap

231 A.2d 450 (1967) PAULEY PETROLEUM, INC., Pauley Pan American Petroleum Company, and American Independent Oil Company de Mexico, S.A. de C.V., Plaintiffs, v. CONTINENTAL OIL COMPANY, Defendant. Court of Chancery of Delaware, New Castle. June 23, 1967. *451 H. Albert Young, H. James Conaway, Jr., and Ben T. Castle, of Young, Conaway, Stargatt &a;

239 A.2d 629 (1968) PAULEY PETROLEUM INC., a corporation of the State of Delaware, Pauley Pan American Petroleum, Inc., a corporation of the State of Delaware, and American Independent Oil Company De Mexico, S.A. de C.V., a corporation of the Republic of Mexico, Plaintiffs Below, Appellants, v. CONTINENTAL OIL COMPANY, a corporation of the State of Delaware, Defendant Below, Appellee. Supreme Court of Delaware.

Duffy, Chancellor: In this case Pauley Petroleum, Inc., a Delaware corporation, Pauley Pan American Petroleum Company, a Delaware corporation,- and American Independent Oil Company de Mexico, S.A. de C.V., a corporation of the'Republic of Mexico (collectively referred to as “Pauley”) seek an injunction restraining Continental Oil Company, a Delaware corporation (“Continental”), its agents and others associated with it, from pros