SOHIO ALASKA PETROLEUM CO.

v.

CIBRO PETROLEUM PRODUCTS, INC.

Citator

Cited By

• Birendra Mohan Sharma v. Skaarup Ship Mgmt. Corp., 916 F.2d 820 (2d Cir. 1990)
  …v. Sohio Alaska Petroleum Co., 602 F.Supp. 1520, 1545 (N.D.N.Y.1985) (stating general contracts principle that if contract is unambiguous, extrinsic evidence should be excluded), aff'd per curiam, 798 F. 2d 1421 (Temp.Emer.Ct.App.), cert. dismissed, 479 U.S. 979, 107 S.Ct. 562, 93 L.Ed.2d 568 (1986); Schmidt v. Magnetic Head Corp., 97 A.D.2d 151, 157, 468 N.Y.S.2d 649, 654 (2d Dep’t.1983) (reference to extrinsic evidence not permitted even to determine whether ambiguity exists in contract). Finally, we rej…
• Robinson v. United States, 897 F.2d 903 (7th Cir. 1990)
  …upon by the Robinson I panel. See 783 F. 2d at 66. There simply was no waiver of counsel — as that term has come to be understood — under the facts in this case. A second similar case is State v. Franklin, 714 S.W. 2d 252 (Tenn.), appeal dismissed, 479 U.S. 979, 107 S.Ct. 563, 93 [*908] L.Ed.2d 569 (1986). In Franklin, the defendant insisted on giving a statement to the jury after one of his defense attorneys gave his final summation. The trial court permitted the defendant to make a statement, even though…