Legal Opinion

Cramer v. Clancy

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided January 7, 1898No. 15PublishedCited by 22 opinions

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. This cause comes here upon appeal by both claimants from a decree of the district court, Southern district of New York, holding both the Shultz and the Little Silver in fault for a collision between the Little Silver and libelants’ schooner, Amos Briggs, in tow of the Shultz. 74 Fed. 574. The collision occurred about 11 a. m. on October 21, 1895, in the North river, between the New…

Read the full summary

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. This cause comes here upon appeal by both claimants from a decree of the district court, Southern district of New York, holding both the Shultz and the Little Silver in fault for a collision between the Little Silver and libelants’ schooner, Amos Briggs, in tow of the Shultz. 74 Fed. 574. The collision occurred about 11 a. m. on October 21, 1895, in the North river, between the New Jersey Central Ferry, on the Jersey side, and the Battery. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion.

1Opinion of the Court

LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

The Shultz, which is a moderate sized tug, about 70 feet long, with the schooner Amos Briggs (about 310 *509feet long oyer all) in tow, on a hawser of 25 fathoms, had come down the North river, on the New Jersey side, and, when abreast of Communipaw Ferry, headed across for the East river. The i ide was strong flood, and the wind fresh from N. W. The Little Silver is a side-wheel steamer, running from Monmouth Park, N. J., 1o Little Twelfth street, North river. She was coming up from the lower bay, making about 14 miles an hour, and heading so as to clear pier 11, on the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. The City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
  2. The DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  3. The Ludvig HolbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
  4. The BritanniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
  5. Hamilton v. KingCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1891

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

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. The PiankatankCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1937
  2. The CygnusCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1905
  3. The MargueriteDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1898
  4. The NewburghCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
  5. The PatriaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1899

17 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