The Gander
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
SWAN, Circuit Judge.
The amended libel alleged nine causes of action for penalties or forfeiture, but only the four counts hereaft.er mentioned are now insisted upon by the appellant. Count 2 claims forfeiture of the vessel under section 4377, Rev. St. (46 USCA § 325), in that she was employed in a trade other than that for which she was licensed. Count 7 claims a penalty under the Act of June 9, 1910 (46 USCA §§ 513, 517), in that she was running at night without lights. Count 8 claims both a penalty and forfeiture of the vessel under section .586 of the Tariff Act of 1922 (19 USCA § 488), in…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Locke v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1813
- Maul v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- United States v. DavidsonCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1931
- The PilotCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1930
- United States v. RendleCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1925
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- The PueblosCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935