Legal Opinion

The West Hartland

District Court, W.D. Washington

Decided February 8, 1924No. 6426PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

NETERER, District Judge.

“It is well settled that the value, which is the measure of the owners’ liability, is the value of the vessel immediately after the collision.” Norwich Co. v. Wright, 13 Wall. 104, 20 L. Ed. 585; In re Wright et al., Fed. Cas. No. 18,066, 30 Fed. Cas. 659; Boston Marine Ins. Co. v. Metropolitan Redwood Lbr. Co., 197 Fed. 703, 117 C. C. A. 97; Pac. Coast Co. v. Reynolds, 114 Fed. 877, 52 C. C. A. 497.

The value of the vessel immediately after the collision obviously was its value in a seaworthy condition, less the cost of repairs. Judge Choate, in Re Wright et al, supra,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Norwich Co. v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  2. Boston Marine Ins. v. Metropolitan Redwood Lumber Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1912
  3. Pacific Coast Co. v. ReynoldsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1902
  4. The Abbie C. StubbsDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1886
  5. The Captain JackDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1908

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Border Line Transp. Co. v. LloydDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1931

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

Powered by the Exa API