Legal Opinion

Corporation of the Royal Exchange Assurance v. United States

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided January 8, 1934PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

COXE, District Judge.

These exceptions challenge the sufficiency of the libels in two suits for cargo loss brought under the 1932 Amendment to the Suits in Admiralty Act (USCA title 46, § 745), on the ground that the prior actions were commenced more than six years after the respective claims first accrued. USCA title 28, § 262. The libels are substantially identical except that, in one the United States is the respondent, and in the other the Shipping Board Corporation. The suits have been consolidated; and there is a stipulation of facts amplifying the allegations of the pleadings.

The libels…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. WILCOX v. the Executors of PlummerSupreme Court of the United States · 1830
  2. Johnson v. United States Shipping Bd. Emergency Fleet CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1930
  3. Steamship Willdomino v. Citro Chemical Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
  4. The Malcolm Baxter, Jr.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
  5. United States Shipping Bd. Emergency Fleet Corporation v. Rosenberg Brothers & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Jensen v. Matson Navigation Co.District Court, D. Hawaii · 1947
  2. Muir v. American Diamond Lines, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1935

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API