United States Second Circuit

In maritime claim against defendants for alleged nonpayment of contracts, decision in favor of plaintiffs is affirmed where: 1) the contracts between plaintiffs and defendants are maritime contracts; 2) the notice requirements of Rule B were met; 3) equitable factors did not weigh in favor of vacating the maritime attachments; and 4) a Rule 11 hearing was not required.

Appellate Information

• Decided 08/22/2008
• Published 08/22/2008

Judges

• POOLER, Circuit Judge:, Before:  CARDAMONE, MINER, and POOLER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• William M. Mattes, Dinsmore & Shohl, LLP, Columbus, OH, and William G. Ballaine, Landman Corsi Ballaine & Ford, P.C., New York, NY, for Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees Thompson, Kirk, Turner, Ford and Cullman., Richard T. Robol and Melanie L. Frankel, Robol Law Office, LPA, Columbus, OH, for Defendants-Appellants-Cross-Appellees Recovery Limited Partnership, Columbus Exploration, LLC, Columbus-America Discovery Group, Inc., Columbus Exploration Limited Partnership, Omni Engineering, Inc., Omni Engineering of Ohio, Inc., Economic Zone Resource Associates, Economic Zone Resource Associates, Ltd., EZRA, Inc., EZRA of Ohio, Inc., Econ Engineering Associates, Inc., Doe E., Inc., James T. Shirley, Jr. and Michael J. Frevola, Holland & Knight, LLP, New York, NY, for Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross-Appellants.