U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, 2010

Nipponkoa Insurance v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · Decided September 29, 2010 · Korman, Leval, Lynch

394 F. App'x 751

Counsel

James R. Lloyd, III (Paul D. Keenan, on the brief), Keenan Cohen & Howard P.C., Jenkintown, Pennsylvania, for Appellants., David T. Maloof (Thomas M. Eagan, on the brief), Maloof, Browne & Eagan LLC, Rye, New York, for Appellees.

Cases that cite this one

6 later published cases cite this decision.

Sompo Japan Insurance Co. of America v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. (District Court, S.D. New York 2012)
Sompo Japan Insurance Co. of America v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. (2d Cir. 2014)
Sompo Japan v. Norfolk So. Railway, Nipponkoa Ins. v. Norfolk So. Railway (2d Cir. 2014)
Sompo Japan Insurance v. Norfolk Southern Railway Co. (District Court, S.D. New York 2013)
Norfolk Southern Railway Co. v. Sun Chemical Corp. (Ga. Ct. App. 2012)
Norfolk Southern Railway Company v. Sun Chemical (Ga. Ct. App. 2012)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

SUMMARY ORDER

The district court granted summary judgment to the plaintiffs in these two related cases based on what was then binding Second Circuit precedent. The parties agree that the Supreme Court, in Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha Ltd. v. Regal-Beloit Corp., 561 U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 2433, 177 L.Ed.2d 424 (2010), has abrogated the precedent upon which the district court relied. See also Royal & Sun Alliance Ins., PLC v. Ocean World Lines, Inc., 612 *752F.3d 138, 140 (2d Cir. 2010). The plaintiffs-appellees have raised further grounds they claim would support the judgment regardless of Regalr-Beloit, but concede that they did not present these grounds below because of the state of the law at the time. The parties therefore have agreed that we should decline to reach these issues so that the district court may have the first opportunity to address them on remand.

The judgment is VACATED and REMANDED for further proceedings.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.