Sea-Land Service, Inc. v. Lozen International, LLC

285 F.3d 808 (9th Cir. 2002)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D arranged with P to transport three 40-foot containers of grapes from Hermosillo, Mexico, to Felixstowe, England with an estimated arrival in Felixstowe on June 28, 1999. P's railroad agent placed the containers on the wrong train. The grapes did not arrive in New Jersey in time for the sailing of the Maersk. P notified D of the problem and asked whether the company preferred to send the containers on the next week's vessel or, instead, to sell them domestically. D elected to sell them domestically at lower prices than it would have received under its original contract with the customer in England. P sued D to recover money owed under a shipping contract. D counterclaimed for damages resulting from P's failure to timely deliver one of the shipments at issue. The parties settled and dismissed P's claim, but they were unable to reach an agreement with respect to D's counterclaims. During the trial, the district court excluded an internal company e-mail authored by one P employee and forwarded to D by a second P employee. The district court excluded this evidence on the ground that d 'makes no argument, nor does it present any evidence indicating the identity or job title of [the] employee' who authored the forwarded e-mail. D argued that the e-mail was admissible and is not hearsay because it is an admission by a party opponent. Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(D). The district court granted P's motion for summary judgment and D appealed.