Legal Opinion

Warner Barnes & Co. v. Kokosai Kisen Kabushiki Kaisha

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided March 6, 1939No. 222, 223PublishedCited by 47 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

L. HAND, Circuit Judge.

This is the usual case for cargo damage: it concerns certain parcels of “centrifugal” sugar, shipped in bags in the Philippines, and delivered by the respondent’s ship, “Glasgow Maru”, at Philadelphia and Savannah in the month of May, 1934. The issues, as finally limited by the parties, are whether the sugar was shipped in good condition; and if so, whether it was properly ventilated — wind and sea permitting —during the voyage. A subsidiary question is whether the ship was overloaded; but this is relevant only so far as it might be thought to add to the probability…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. The Niel MaerskCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
  2. The Silver PalmCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1937
  3. Habicht Braun & Co. v. KaishaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
  4. Compania Generale de Tobacos de Filipinas v. Kokusai Kisen Kabushiki KaishaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1937
  5. The Matilde PeirceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929

3Cited by47 opinions

  1. Kyoei Fire & Marine Insurance v. M/V Maritime AntalyaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2007
  2. Reider v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
  3. The AnacondaCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1947
  4. Philippine Sugar Centrals Agency v. Kokusai Kisen Kabushiki KaishaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
  5. Rose Wong and Kent Wong v. Walter Swier and Laura SwierCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1959

42 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