Legal Opinion

Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. California Sea Products Co.

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided July 22, 1931No. 6341PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SAWTELLE, Circuit Judge (after stating the facts):

We are not disposed to disturb the findings of the commissioner with regard to the strictly factual question of whether or not the repairs to the Lansing were done with the greatest expedition, and whether the whaling boats could have left port several days before their actual departure. There was strongly conflicting testimony on both sides of the question, and the commissioner made a decision after a full consideration of the matter. In the absence of palpable error, that finding may stand. But the basis on which the allowance of demurrage…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. The ConquerorSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  2. The Apollon.Supreme Court of the United States · 1824
  3. Central Coal & Coke Co. v. HartmanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
  4. Pacific Steam Whaling Co. v. Alaska Packers' Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Anderson v. Alaska S. S. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1927

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Van Camp Sea Food Co. v. Di LevaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1948
  2. Eriksen v. Pacific American FisheriesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1936
  3. Morse Dry Dock & Repair Co. v. Standard Shipping Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1932
  4. Pittston Marine Corp. v. H. A. Brassert & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API