Legal Opinion · Dissent

Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc. v. McMahon

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided June 29, 1956No. 316, Docket 23960Published

1DissentFrank, Circuit Judge

I agree with my colleagues’ interpretation of Admiralty Rule 50 and with their expressed attitude towards the survival of the alleged claims by appellant against the estates of the three deceased ship’s officers. However, I do not agree with the last paragraph of my colleagues’ opinion. The difference between their view and mine is important: If my colleagues are correct— i. e., if those estates are already represented by appellees in the limitation proceedings — then Admiralty Rule 50 applies, and appellant can prosecute its claims against those estates in that proceeding without service of…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. SchendelSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. CraftSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  3. Lindgren v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  4. Blood v. . KaneNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  5. Cooper v. American Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1945

18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API