Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T16:24:28.184Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit: Mingtai Fire & Marine Insurance co., Ltd. v. United Parcel Service

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Judicial and Similar Proceedings
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 38 , Issue 5 , September 1999 , pp. 1274 - 1277
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1999

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

177 F.3d 1142 (9lh Cir. 1999).

References

Endnotes

1 Mingtai also brought state law claims for negligence which the district court held were preempted by federal law. Mingtai does not appeal that portion of the district court's ruling.

2 The history of the prior relations between the United States, China, and Taiwan has been exhaustively summarized elsewhere. See, e.g., New York Chinese TV Programs, Inc. v. U.E. Enterprises, Inc., 954 F.2d 847, 849-50 (2d Cir. 1992); Tzu-Wen Lee, The International Legal Status of the Republic of China on Taiwan, 1 UCLA J. Int'l L. & Foreign Aff. 351, 353-354 (1997).

3 Having done so, we deny UPS's Motion to Strike Plaintiff-Appellant's Request for Judicial Notice as moot.