Carol McIndoe et al v. Crane Co et al, No. 2:2012cv09639 - Document 284 (C.D. Cal. 2013)
Court Description: JUDGMENT by Judge R. Gary Klausner, having considered the motion for summary judgment 133 as explained by order dated 8/29/13 258 . plaintiffsCarol McIndoe, as wrongful death heir and successor in interest to decedent James McIndoe and Lorraine Mc Indoe and Pauline McIndoe, as legal heirs of decedent James McIndoe take nothing by way of their complaint against defendant Huntington Ingalls Incorporated, that all claims against HII be dismissed on the merits, and that HII recover its costs. ha ving determined that there is no just reason for delay in entry of this final judgment in favor of Huntington Ingalls Incorporated, the Court expressly directs that the clerk enter this separate final judgment in favor of HII on all claims asserted by Plaintiffs pursuant to Civ.R. 54(b) notwithstanding the existence of claims against other parties. (ir)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Carol McIndoe et al v. Crane Co et al Doc. 284 1 TUCKER ELLIS LLP Daniel J. Kelly - SBN 145088 2 daniel.kelly@tuckerellis.com 135 Main Street, Suite 700 3 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: 415.617.2400 Facsimile: 415.617.2409 4 5 TUCKER ELLIS LLP John K. Son - SBN 238516 6 john.son@tuckerellis.com 515 So. Flower Street, 42nd Floor 7 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: 213.430.3400 Facsimile: 213.430.3409 8 Los Angeles Denver Columbus Cleveland TUCKER ELLIS LLP San Francisco 9 Attorneys for Defendant HUNTINGTON INGALLS INCORPORATED, 10 formerly known as Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 12 CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 13 WESTERN DIVISION- LOSANGELES 14 CAROL MCINDOE, as Wrongful Death 15 Heir, and as Successor-in-Interest to JAMES MCINDOE, Deceased; and 16 LORRAINE MCINDOE and PAULINE MCINDOE, as Legal Heirs of JAMES 17 MCINDOE, Deceased, [PROPOSED] JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF HUNTINGTON INGALLS INCORPORATED Plaintiffs, 18 19 Case No. 2:12-cv-09639 RGK (SS) v. 20 CRANE CO., et al., Hon. R. Gary Klauser Defendants. 21 22 23 The Court, having read and considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers 24 with respect to the motion for summary judgment of defendant Huntington Ingalls 25 Incorporated, formerly known as Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc., formerly known 26 as Newport News Shipbuilding and Dry Dock Company (“HII”) against plaintiffs Carol 27 McIndoe, Lorraine McIndoe, and Pauline McIndoe (“Plaintiffs”) [Doc. No. 133], and 28 having determined that no genuine issue of material fact exists and that HII is entitled to JUDGMENT 012758.000059/931492 Dockets.Justia.com 1 summary judgment under Civ.R. 56 based on a finding that Plaintiffs’ strict liability 2 cause of action is without merit because a Navy ship is not a “product” and that 3 Plaintiffs’ causes of action for strict liability and negligence fail due to insufficient 4 evidence of causation as explained by order dated August 29, 2013 [Doc. No. 258], 5 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that plaintiffs 6 Carol McIndoe, as wrongful death heir and successor in interest to decedent James 7 McIndoe and Lorraine McIndoe and Pauline McIndoe, as legal heirs of decedent James 8 McIndoe take nothing by way of their complaint against defendant Huntington Ingalls 9 Incorporated, that all claims against HII be dismissed on the merits, and that HII recover 11 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that having determined that there is no just reason Los Angeles 15 claims against other parties. Columbus Denver 12 for delay in entry of this final judgment in favor of Huntington Ingalls Incorporated, the 13 Court expressly directs that the clerk enter this separate final judgment in favor of HII on Cleveland TUCKER ELLIS LLP San Francisco 10 its costs. 14 all claims asserted by Plaintiffs pursuant to Civ.R. 54(b) notwithstanding the existence of 16 17 IT IS SO ORDERED. 18 19 DATED: September 13, 2013 20 _________________________________ R. Gary Klausner United States District Court Judge 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 JUDGMENT 012758.000059/931492 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 012758.000059/931492
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
