From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cemex Inc. v. Industrial Contracting & Erecting, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Nov 16, 2007
254 F. App'x 148 (3d Cir. 2007)

Opinion

Nos. 06-3515, 06-3587.

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) October 30, 2007.

Filed November 16, 2007.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Civil No. 02-cv-01240), District Judge: Honorable Terrence F. McVerry.

Richard D. Gable, Jr., Gibbons, Philadelphia, PA, for Appellant.

Francis X. McTiernan, Jr., Jeffrey A. Kubay, Wayman, Irvin McAuley, Pittsburgh, PA, for Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff.

James F. Israel, Matis, Baum, Rizza O'Connor, Pittsburgh, PA, for Third-Party Defendant.

Before: RENDELL and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges, and VANASKIE, District Judge.

Honorable Thomas I. Vanaskie, Judge of the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation.


OPINION OF THE COURT


Cemex, Inc. (Cemex) appeals from an order entered by the District Court granting defendant Industrial Contracting and Erecting, Inc.'s (ICE) motion for summary judgment. Cemex raises two arguments on appeal. First, Cemex asserts that the District Court erred in holding that Cemex is collaterally estopped from pursuing its property damage claims against ICE as a result the jury's findings in Carcaise v. Cemex, Inc. v. ICE, No. CA 01-00859 (W.D.Pa. May 16, 2005). Second, Cemex argues that the District Court erred in concluding that the doctrine of res judicata served to bar Cemex's claims against ICE. ICE cross-appeals, requesting that should we reverse the grant of summary judgment in its favor, we reverse an order entered by the District Court granting third-party defendant Minserco Inc.'s motion for summary judgment.

We agree with the District Court that the issues raised here were essentially decided in Carcaise. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in the District Court's well-reasoned opinion, we will affirm the District Court's orders granting ICE's motion for summary judgment and Minserco Inc.'s motion for summary judgment.


Summaries of

Cemex Inc. v. Industrial Contracting & Erecting, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Nov 16, 2007
254 F. App'x 148 (3d Cir. 2007)
Case details for

Cemex Inc. v. Industrial Contracting & Erecting, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:CEMEX INC., Appellant v. INDUSTRIAL CONTRACTING AND ERECTING, INC.…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Date published: Nov 16, 2007

Citations

254 F. App'x 148 (3d Cir. 2007)

Citing Cases

Sokol v. Brent Clark, M.D. P.C.

Under Pennsylvania law, another court's determination of an issue has preclusive effect if: (1) the issue…

GGNSC Uniontown, LP v. Bauer

Penn Mont Securities v. Frucher, 502 F.Supp.2d 443 at n. 8 (E.D. Pa. 2007). Under Pennsylvania law, another…