Legal Opinion
Tanker Hygrade No. 24, Inc. v. The Tug Dynamic
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided May 16, 1956No. 329, Docket 23998PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEDINA, Circuit Judge.
Libellant-appellee is the owner of Hygrade No. 24, a barge was which damaged in a collision with claimant-appellant’s tug Dynamic. In a prior opinion, the District Court held that the Dynamic was solely to blame, and, on appeal, we affirmed. Tanker Hygrade No. 24 v. The Dynamic, 2 Cir., 213 F.2d 453. The matter was then referred to a Commissioner who, after a hearing to determine damages, reported that the libellant should recover a total of $12,662.40,. $10,852.40 for repairs and $1,800 for gas freeing. The Commissioner also reported that libellant had not proved…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- The ConquerorSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- District of Columbia v. WoodburySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
- The " Potomac"Supreme Court of the United States · 1882
- The President MadisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1937
- Noonan v. Caledonia Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1887
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Marathon Pipe Line Company v. M/v Sea Level II v. Oceanonics, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986
- Master Shipping Agency, Inc. v. M. S. FaridaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1978
- Independent Bulk Transport, Inc. v. The Vessel "Morania Abaco"Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- Turecamo Maritime, Inc. v. Weeks Dredge No. 516District Court, S.D. New York · 1994
- Standard Marine Towing Services, Inc. v. M.T. Dua MarDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1989
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.