Legal Opinion
Barber S. S. Lines, Inc. v. Quinn Bros.
District Court, D. Massachusetts
Decided February 29, 1952No. Civ. A. 50-409PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WYZANSKI, District Judge.
Defendant moves to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a cause of action.
This motion presents the question whether under Halcyon Lines, etc. v. Haenn Ship C. & R. Corp., 342 U.S. 282, 72 S.Ct. 277, a shipowner who has made expenditures to discharge its liability to a stevedore injured by a loose hatch cover is precluded from securing restitution ifrom a company which did not employ the stevedore but which, acting under a contract with the shipowner, had negligently replaced the hatch cover a month before the injury.
At this stage of the case the Court…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Halcyon Lines v. Haenn Ship Ceiling & Refitting Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Washington Gas Light Co. v. District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- American Stevedores, Inc. v. PorelloSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Westchester Lighting Co. v. Westchester County Small Estates Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1938
- Slattery v. Marra Bros., Inc. Marra Bros., Inc. v. Wm. Spencer & Son CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1951
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Crawford v. Pope & Talbot, Inc. Lucibello v. Pope & Talbot, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1953
- Read v. United States. United States Maritime Commission v. Williams Appeal of VassilopoulusCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1953
- Valerio v. American President Lines, Ltd.District Court, S.D. New York · 1952
- Hidick v. Orion Shipping and Trading Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1957
- United States Lines Company v. EJ Lavino & CompanyDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1961
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.