1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.2d
  4. 866 F.2d
  5. 866 F.2d 881 (1989)
 

AFFHOLDER, INC. v. PRESTON CARROLL CO., INC.

Nos. 86-5348, 86-5349.

866 F.2d 881 (1989)

AFFHOLDER, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, (86-5348), Plaintiff-Appellee, (86-5349), v. PRESTON CARROLL COMPANY, INC., and CFW Construction Company, Inc., Defendants-Appellees, (86-5348). PRESTON CARROLL COMPANY, INC., and CFW Construction Company, Inc., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants, (86-5349), v. The LOUISVILLE AND JEFFERSON COUNTY METROPOLITAN SEWER DISTRICT OF JEFFERSON COUNTY, KENTUCKY, H.C. Nutting Company, Hubbard E. Ruddy Consulting Engineers, Inc. and Presnell Associates, Inc., James-Winstead & Associates, Inc., D.M.J.M., Inc. (Successor in Name to Vollmer Associates, Inc.), and E. Lionel Pavlo, Consulting Engineer, d/b/a Vollmer-Presnell-Pavlo, a Joint Venture, Third-Party Defendants-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Decided February 1, 1989.

Rehearing and Rehearing Denied March 20, 1989.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Stephen S. Schustes, Odgen, Robertson and Marshall, Louisville, Ky., G. Carroll Stribling, Jr. (argued), Fordyce & Mayne, St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff-appellant in No. 86-5348.

Thomas J. Kirkwood, Cincinnati, Ohio, Kyle T. Hubbard, Walter K. Swyers, Jr., Karen A. Conrad, Louisville, Ky., for defendants-appellees in No. 86-5348.

John K. Gordinier (argued), Louisville, Ky., for Louisville & Jefferson Co. Metro. Sewer Dist.

Mary G. Moody (argued), Trabue, Sturdivant & Dewitt, Nashville, Tenn., for third-party plaintiffs-appellants in No. 86-5349.

Before ENGEL, Chief Judge; and KRUPANSKY and GUY, Circuit Judges.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied March 20, 1989.

ENGEL, Chief Judge.

This appeal requires us to consider whether, under Article III, Section 2 of the United States Constitution, a cooperative litigation agreement executed by the plaintiff and defendant has eliminated any "case or controversy" between the parties, thus depriving the district court of jurisdiction over this litigation. The district court held that the litigation agreement eliminated a...

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