Columbia Steel Fabricators, Inc. Stevens Equipment Company v. Ahlstrom Recovery Aaro Kohonen Oy

Good Law
44 F.3d 800·95 Daily Journal DAR 403·30 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1413·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 173·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 225
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 9, 199593-15659California1,269 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kleinfeld, J.

The district court granted summary judgment sua sponte against plaintiffs, even though the defendant had not yet appeared. Another defendant had won summary judgment on the same grounds, and the court found the case to be frivolous. We affirm.

Facts

Ahlstrom was the general contractor building a boiler for Louisiana Pacific Corporation. Ahlstrom hired Stevens Equipment for steel fabrication, and Stevens contracted with its affiliate Columbia Steel for materials. Ahlstrom hired Aaro Kohonen Oy (AKO), in Finland, for engineering.

Stevens and Colmnbia made a number of claims against Ahlstrom, including that the engineering was bad and late, costing them more money. Stevens sued Ahlstrom in California state court, and then arbitrated its claims on its own and Columbia’s behalf. Stevens prevailed in arbitration, but not on the claims related to the case at bar. After the arbitration award was reduced to judgment in state court, Columbia and Stevens brought this diversity suit.

In this federal case, AKO, the engineering subcontractor in Finland, never appeared. It had been served, but Stevens and Columbia had not filed proof of service, or requested entry of default, so…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.