Second Circuit· 11/13/2009

Hawknet, Ltd. v. Overseas Shipping Agencies

Citations

590 F.3d 87
2010 A.M.C. 305
2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 28599
2009 WL 4911944

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that a defendant had not waived an argument that it failed to make in the district court because the argument “would have been directly contrary to controlling precedent in this Circuit” at the time of trial
remarking that personal jurisdiction defense is not waived where, prior to the time it was raised, it would have been “contrary to controlling precedent”
noting that a party does not waive a defense when controlling precedent previously foreclosed it
remarking that personal jurisdiction defense is not waived where, prior to the time it was raised, it would have been “contrary to controlling precedent”
finding that despite the fact that “the parties relied on [a prior overruled decision] when structuring their transactions, the Supreme Court has held that a reliance interest is insufficient to overcome the presumption of retroactivity set forth in Harper”
relying on Jaldhi to affirm district court’s vacatur of attached EFTs under Rule E(4)(f)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Winter, Cabranes, Hall

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Hawknet, Ltd. v. Overseas Shipping Agencies

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.