Legal Opinion
The Argentino
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided June 7, 1939PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
28 F.Supp. 440 (1939)
THE ARGENTINO.
BUXTON LIMITIDA, S. A.,
v.
REDERI et al.
District Court, S. D. New York.
June 7, 1939.
Bailey & Muller, of New York City (Julius F. Steinbrenner, of New York City, of counsel), for libelant.
Haight, Griffin, Deming & Gardner, of New York City (J. Ward O'Neill, of New York City, of counsel), for respondents.
LEIBELL, District Judge.
Claimants and respondents move for an order "dismissing the libel on the ground that the said libel was not filed within the time limited by law for the commencement of an action thereon." The libel is for damages to a shipment of eight…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Georgia, Florida & Alabama Railway Co. v. Blish Milling Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
- A. J. Phillips Co. v. Grand Trunk Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
- Teer v. George A. Fuller Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1929
- Buxton Limitida v. RederiDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1939
3Cited by13 opinions
- Hopper Paper Co. v. Baltimore & O.R. CoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1949
- United Fruit Company v. J. A. Folger & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc. v. Cunard Steamship LimitedDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1973
- Francosteel Corp. v. N. v. Nederlandsch AmerikaanscheCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
- Potter v. North German LloydDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1943
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.