Opinion
Civil Action 15-921 17-266
03-11-2022
RHOADS INDUSTRIES, INC., et al v. SHORELINE FOUNDATION, INC., et al RHOADS INDUSTRIES, INC., et al v. TRITON MARINE CONSTRUCTION CORP.
ORDER
DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
AND NOW, this 10th day of March 2022, upon consideration of extensive briefing by the parties (Dkt. 17-366, Docs. 191, 192, 197, 199 and attachments); (Dkt. 15-921, Docs. 162, 172, 173, 175, 163, 176, 177, 179 and attachments), it is hereby ORDERED that Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment are, as set out in the attached Memorandum Opinion, DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART as follows:
1. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff's Alleged Lack of Expert Testimony on “Loss of Use” and Dry Dock 2's “Special Purpose Property” Qualification (Dkt. 17-266, Docs. 191, 192) is DENIED.
2. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff's Alleged Lack of Article III Standing for Property Damage Claims and Inability to Prove Causation (Dkt. 15-921, Doc. 162) is DENIED.
3. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment on the Applicability of Derivative
Immunity, Government Contractor, and Abnormally Dangerous Activity Defenses (Dkt. 15-921, Docs. 163) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Defendants' Motion is GRANTED as to the requested dismissal of Plaintiff's strict liability claims against Defendants Shoreline Foundation, Inc. and Triton Marine Construction Corp., in accordance with Pennsylvania's “abnormally dangerous activity” doctrine. Defendants' Motion is DENIED as to all remaining claims.