1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.Supp.2d
  4. 458 F.Supp.2d
  5. 458 F.Supp.2d 1153 (2006)
 

BODELL CONST. CO. v. OHIO PACIFIC TECH, INC.

Civil No. 03-00706 JMS/LEK.

458 F.Supp.2d 1153 (2006)

BODELL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a Utah corporation, Plaintiff, v. OHIO PACIFIC TECH, INC., fka GMP Associates, Inc., an Ohio corporation; City and County of Honolulu; Ultra Tech Systems, Inc., a foreign corporation, Defendants. City and County of Honolulu, Defendant, Third-Party Plaintiff, and Counterclaim Defendant, v. Engineered Systems, Inc., Third-Party Defendant, Counterclaim Plaintiff and Cross-Claim Plaintiff. City and County of Honolulu, Defendant, Cross-Claim Plaintiff/Cross-Claim Defendant, v. Ultra Tech Systems, Inc., a foreign corporation, Defendant, Cross-Claim Defendant/Cross-Claim Plaintiff and Cross-Claim Plaintiff/Defendant, v. Ohio Pacific Tech, Inc., fka GMP Associates, Inc., an Ohio corporation, Cross-Claim Defendant/Plaintiff.

United States District Court, D. Hawai'i.

September 26, 2006.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

David Schulmeister, Kristin S. Shigemura, Cades Schutte, Honolulu, HI, for Plaintiff.

Richard C. Sutton, Jr., Sakai Iwananga Sutton Law Group, Honolulu, HI, for Defendants and Cross-Claim Defendant/Plaintiff.

Bert T. Kobayashi, Jr., Ronald T. Ogomori, Nathan H. Yoshimoto, George Gusman, III, Kobayashi Sugita & Goda, Gary Y. Takeuchi, Maile R. Chun, Office of Corporation Counsel, Honolulu, HI, for Defendant, Third-Party Plaintiff, and Counterclaim Defendant.

Adrian W. Rosehill, Alan J. Ma, Owen Matsunaga, Gerson & Hieneman, Honolulu, HI, for Third-Party Defendant, Counterclaim Plaintiff and Cross-Claim Plaintiff.

Reginauld T. Harris, Rush Moore LLP, Honolulu, HI, for Cross-Claim Defendant/Plaintiff.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

SEABRIGHT, District Judge.

I. INTRODUCTION

Before the court are five separate motions for summary judgment, all flowing from disputes arising during a construction project at the Wahiawa wastewater treatment plant. In short, the court rules as follows: the court DENIES AS MOOT the Motion for Summary Judgment brought...

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