Legal Opinion

Berwind White Coal Mining Co. v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided November 1, 1926No. 37PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHand, Circuit Judge

(after stating the

facts as above). As a bailee, the respondent would normally be liable for negligence, and for nothing more. C. F. Harms Co. v. Upper Hudson Stone Co., 234 F. 859, 148 C. C. A. 457 (C. C. A. 2). Indeed, in this circuit a covenant to redeliver in good condition, less wear and tear, adds nothing to the charterer’s obligation. Mulvaney v. King Paint Co., 256 F. 615, 167 C. C. A. 642; Wandell v. New Haven Trap Rock Co. (C. C. A.) 285 F. 339; Simmons Transportation Co. v. Wright & Cobb Co. (D. C.) 290 F. 454, affirmed (C. C. A.) 296 F. 1023. Thus, unless the clause relieved , the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Morgan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  2. Mulvaney v. King Paint Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1919
  3. C. F. Harms Co. v. Upper Hudson Stone Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1916
  4. New Orleans-Belize Royal Mail & Central American Steamship Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1915
  5. Simmons Transp. Co. v. Wright & Cobb Lighterage Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1923

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Alpine Forwarding Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1932
  2. Tomkins Cove Stone Co. v. Bleakley Transp. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1930
  3. The Vale RoyalDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1943
  4. Patton-Tully Transp. Co. v. BarrettCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1930
  5. Dow Chemical Co. v. Dixie Carriers, Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1971

6 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