HYUNDAI MERCHANT MARINE CO LTD v. UNITED STATES (1996)

United States Court of Appeals,Second Circuit.

HYUNDAI MERCHANT MARINE CO., LTD., Pohang Iron and Steel Co., Ltd., the Oriental Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., the Shin Dong-A Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., Daehan Fire, Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., International Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., Koryo Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., First Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., Haedong Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., the Ankuk Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., Hyundai Marine & Fire Insurance Co., Ltd., Lucky Insurance Co., Ltd., Korea Automobile Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 959, Docket 95-6178.

Decided: January 26, 1996

Before: NEWMAN, Chief Judge, MAHONEY and FRIEDMAN,* Circuit Judges.

John W. Wall, New York City (Richard V. Singleton, Healy & Baillie, New York City, on the brief), for plaintiffs-appellants. Janis C. Schulmeisters, U.S. Dept. of Justice, New York City (Frank W. Hunger, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jack S. Rockafellow, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Mary Jo White, U.S. Atty., S.D.N.Y., New York City, on the brief), for defendant-appellee.

This is an appeal from the June 6, 1995, judgment of the District Court for the Southern District of New York (Peter K. Leisure, Judge), dismissing a tort claim against the United States as barred by 10 U.S.C. § 2798 (1994). Hyundai Merchant Marine Co. v. United States, 888 F.Supp. 543 (S.D.N.Y.1995). The appeal presents essentially two issues: (a) whether a suit based on the failure of the Defense Mapping Agency to update a navigational chart is within the scope of section 2798, which provides that “[n]o civil action may be brought against the United States on the basis of the content of a navigational aid prepared or disseminated by the Defense Mapping Agency,” and (b) if so, whether the application of section 2798 in this case denies the appellants any constitutional rights.

The District Court answered the first question in the affirmative and the second question in the negative, and therefore dismissed the suit. We affirm on the basis of Judge Leisure's comprehensive and well-reasoned opinion.

JON O. NEWMAN, Chief Judge:

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law