Legal Opinion

Lorang v. Alaska S. S. Co.

District Court, W.D. Washington

Decided October 30, 1924No. 8784PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtNeterer, District Judge

(after stating the facts as above). The motion to strike the parts of articles VI and YII specified in the motion is granted, and as to article VIII as set forth is denied. The motion as to the portions of article XI moved against is granted, the same being clearly frivolous and irrelevant. It is immaterial whether the defendant carelessly and negligently took on board the cargo of copper, or whether there wore no lights as set forth in article YII, or whether the defendant made inquiry with relation to the condition of the weather.

The plaintiff seeks to have his claim for injury measured by…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. The OsceolaSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
  2. Milwaukee & Saint Paul Railway Co. v. KelloggSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
  3. The Fair v. Kohler Die & Specialty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
  4. Chelentis v. Luckenbach Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
  5. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. BaughSupreme Court of the United States · 1893

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Dubuque Fire and Marine Insurance Company v. Clifford Caylor, Fayne Caylor and Merle Caylor, Doing Business as Caylor Brothers Construction CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API