UMPQUA RIVER NAV. CO. v. CRESCENT CITY HARBOR DIST.

Nos. 77-4000, 77-4046.

618 F.2d 588 (1980)

UMPQUA RIVER NAVIGATION COMPANY, Appellant, v. CRESCENT CITY HARBOR DISTRICT, Appellee. UMPQUA RIVER NAVIGATION COMPANY, Cross-Appellee, v. CRESCENT CITY HARBOR DISTRICT, Cross-Appellant.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

May 12, 1980.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

David M. Buoncristiani, San Francisco, Cal., Daniel J. Seifer, Kobin & Meyer, Portland, Or., argued for Umpqua River Navigation; Thelen, Marrin, Johnson & Bridges, San Francisco, Cal., Norman B. Kobin, Portland, Or., on brief.

David M. Van Hoesen, Eric Danoff, Graham & James, San Francisco, Cal., argued for Crescent City Harbor Dist.; Thomas M. Dillon, Williams, Van Hoesen & Brigham, San Francisco, Cal., on brief.

Before CHOY and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges, and SOLOMON, District Judge.


GOODWIN, Circuit Judge:

Umpqua River Navigation Company (Umpqua), a general contractor, appeals a judgment denying recovery of cost overruns incurred by its subcontractor, Western Pacific Dredging Corporation (Western), while dredging a boat basin for Crescent City harbor district. Umpqua alleged, under various contract and tort theories, that specifications provided by the harbor district and prepared by Swinc Engineering, Inc. inaccurately represented soil conditions...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases