Case Name: WEYERHAEUSER CO., a Washington Corp., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RELIANCE INSURANCE CO., Surety for Combustion Equipment Assoc. Inc., A New York Corp., and Combustion Corp., A California Corp., Defendants-Appellants, and Williams Patent Crusher and Pulverizer Co., Inc., a Missouri Corp., Third Party Defendant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1983-04-14
Citations: 707 F.2d 366
Docket Number: No. 81-3698
Parties: WEYERHAEUSER CO., a Washington Corp., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RELIANCE INSURANCE CO., Surety for Combustion Equipment Assoc. Inc., A New York Corp., and Combustion Corp., A California Corp., Defendants-Appellants, and Williams Patent Crusher and Pulverizer Co., Inc., a Missouri Corp., Third Party Defendant.
Judges: Before KILKENNY, WALLACE and SCHROEDER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 707
Pages: 366–367

Head Matter:
WEYERHAEUSER CO., a Washington Corp., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RELIANCE INSURANCE CO., Surety for Combustion Equipment Assoc. Inc., A New York Corp., and Combustion Corp., A California Corp., Defendants-Appellants, and Williams Patent Crusher and Pulverizer Co., Inc., a Missouri Corp., Third Party Defendant.
No. 81-3698.
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
Argued and Submitted Jan. 6, 1983.
Decided April 14, 1983.
Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied June 10, 1983.
W.A. Jerry North, Schwabe, Williamson, Wyatt, Moore & Roberts, Portland, Or., for defendants-appellants.
Karen K. Creason, Davies, Biggs, Strayer, Stoel & Boley, Portland, Or., for plaintiffappellee.
Before KILKENNY, WALLACE and SCHROEDER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
WALLACE, Circuit Judge.
While this case was under submission this court decided the unrelated ease of Turner v. Japan Lines, Ltd., 702 F.2d 752 (9th Cir.1983). The decision in Turner deals with the sole issue presented in this appeal and holds exactly the opposite of what the district court held in its opinion and judgment of November 24, 1981. There being no contrary controlling authority from the Oregon courts, we are bound by the decision in Turner. Accordingly, the district court's decision is reversed, judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded with directions for the court to enter a new judgment consistent with Turner.