Legal Opinion

Sumner v. Caswell

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided May 9, 1884PublishedCited by 21 opinions

This libel was filed by the owners of the ship Gastine to limit their liability under sections 4283, 4284, of the Revised Statutes. At the same time they contest their liability. The ship was chartered by a contract of affreightment, to .carry a “full and complete cargo of refined petroleum in the customary low-top, ten-gallon cases, at forty-seven and a half cents per case,” from Philadelphia to Yokohama, Hiogo, or Nagasaki, Japan.

Read the full summary

This libel was filed by the owners of the ship Gastine to limit their liability under sections 4283, 4284, of the Revised Statutes. At the same time they contest their liability. The ship was chartered by a contract of affreightment, to .carry a “full and complete cargo of refined petroleum in the customary low-top, ten-gallon cases, at forty-seven and a half cents per case,” from Philadelphia to Yokohama, Hiogo, or Nagasaki, Japan. On the part of the owners, the charter-party provided that the vessel should be “tight, stanch, strong, and every way fitted for such voyage, and to receive on…

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The libelants have proved, so far as affirmative testimony in such cases can prove, that there was no intentional failure in any respect to make the ship seaworthy by means of proper loading, stowage, dunnage, and the use of all the ballast which, from the previous trips of the ship, they supposed would be required. The ship had not carried petroleum in cases before; but she had carried it in *251barrels, wMch would seem to be not loss compact and steady than the cases; and 90 tons of ballast were used, which was all that had been before found necessary. On the ground that they used all such care…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Propeller Niagara v. CordesSupreme Court of the United States · 1859
  2. Work v. LeathersSupreme Court of the United States · 1878
  3. The Lizzie W. VirdenU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern New York · 1881

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Nichimen Company, Inc. v. M. v. Farland, Her Engines, Boilers, Etc., and A/s Vigra, Defendants-Appellants-Appellees v. Seaboard Shipping Co., Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1972
  2. The FriCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1907
  3. Corsar v. J. D. Spreckels & Bros.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1905
  4. The Benjamin NobleCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1917
  5. The FerncliffDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1938

16 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