The Katahdin
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the CourtLearned' Hand, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
Perhaps it is true that rule 54 of the Admiralty Rules is not exhaustive of all cases in which a petition of limitation will lie. Ex parte Slayton, 105 U. S. 451, 26 L. Ed. 1066; In re Louisville & Cincinnati Packet Co. (D. C.) 223 Fed. 185, 190-193; The Enterprise (D. C.) 196 Fed. 404, 410. Yet in cases where the rule provides for jurisdiction I cannot agree with the ruling in The Enterprise, supra, that this court has the power to dismiss the petition, because the case is a hard one. In the case at bar the vessel has been three times libeled, once in…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Steamship Co. v. MountSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Ex Parte SlaytonSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- In re Louisville & Cincinnati Packet Co.District Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1915
- The EnterpriseDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1912
3Cited by1 opinion
- In re Baker-Whiteley Towing Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1956