From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ghotra v. Bandila Shipping, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Mar 28, 1996
81 F.3d 168 (9th Cir. 1996)

Summary

characterizing the 9th Circuit's holding in Rozay's Transfer, 791 F.2d at 770

Summary of this case from Bd. of Trs. of Painters & Floorcoverers Joint Comm. v. Olympus & Assocs.

Opinion


81 F.3d 168 (9th Cir. 1996) Erica Kaur GHOTRA, and Ravinder Singh Ghotra, minors, by Susan Ghotra, their guardian ad litem; Susan Ghotra; Amolak Ghotra; Sarvit Kaur Ghotra; and Susan Ghotra, as administrator of the Estate of Kuldip S. Ghotra, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BANDILA SHIPPING, INC.; "M/V GRACIOUS", her Engines, Tackle, Apparel, Furniture and Appurtenances, in rem Defendants-Appellees,and Palm Maritime, S.A. Defendant. No. 93-56326. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit March 28, 1996

Editorial Note:

This opinion appears in the Federal reporter in a table titled "Table of Decisions Without Reported Opinions". (See FI CTA9 Rule 36-3 regarding use of unpublished opinions)

Argued and Submitted March 7, 1996.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, No. CV-91-5469-RSWL; Ronald S.W. Lew, District Judge, Presiding.

C.D.Cal.

REMANDED.

Before: PREGERSON, T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges, and EZRA, District Judge.

Honorable David Alan Ezra, United States District Judge for the District of Hawaii, sitting by designation.

ORDER

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

The matter is hereby remanded to the District Court for further proceedings and consideration in light of the United States Supreme Court's recent decision in Yamaha Motor Corp. v. Calhoun, 516 U.S. 199, 116 S.Ct. 619 (1996), with particular attention to the question of whether Captain Ghotra was a seafarer within the meaning of the Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act at the time of his death.

In fulfilling this mandate, the District Court may hold such hearings and conduct proceedings as necessary, including modifying or vacating its previous judgment.

This panel shall retain jurisdiction over this appeal and requests the district court to advise us of its decision on the seafarer question within sixty days of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Ghotra v. Bandila Shipping, Inc.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit
Mar 28, 1996
81 F.3d 168 (9th Cir. 1996)

characterizing the 9th Circuit's holding in Rozay's Transfer, 791 F.2d at 770

Summary of this case from Bd. of Trs. of Painters & Floorcoverers Joint Comm. v. Olympus & Assocs.
Case details for

Ghotra v. Bandila Shipping, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Erica Kaur GHOTRA, and Ravinder Singh Ghotra, minors, by Susan Ghotra…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

Date published: Mar 28, 1996

Citations

81 F.3d 168 (9th Cir. 1996)

Citing Cases

The Bd. of Trs. v. Slauson

However, subsequent cases have given a Bla-Delco a narrow reading. See, e.g., Laborers Health & Welfare …

Sutton Place 1 Townhouse v. Amguard Ins. Co.

Besides considering the plaintiff's pleadings when assessing whether a plaintiff's claims are time-barred,…