Legal Opinion
Patel Cotton Co. v. the Steel Traveler
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided September 22, 1952PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
IRVING R. KAUFMAN, District Judge.
Three motions are before me. In the first, respondent-impleaded, Anderson Clayton & Co., Inc. (hereafter referred to as “Clayton”) excepts to the petition of respondent, Todd Shipyards Corporation (hereafter referred to as “Todd”), upon the ground that “on the facts recited” in that petition “the petitioner is not entitled to any relief against the respondent-impleaded Anderson Clayton & Co., Inc.”
Libellant brings this action to recover for damage to a cargo of cotton which resulted from a fire occurring on the S/S Steel Traveler while the vessel was…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Bomze v. Nardis Sportswear, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1948
- Ray D. Lillibridge, Inc. v. Johnson Bronze CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Lyons-Magnus, Inc. v. American-Hawaiian S. S. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1941
- Landell v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.District Court, District of Columbia · 1951
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Gkiafis v. Steamship YiosonasCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1965
- Seawind Compania, S. A. v. Crescent Line, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
- Chilean Line Inc., Libelant-Appellant v. United States of America, and Main Ship Repair Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1965
- United States v. Cia. Naviera Continental S.A.District Court, S.D. New York · 1959
- Seawind Compania, S.A. v. Crescent Line, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1963
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.