Legal Opinion

Loraine v. Coastwise Lines, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided July 14, 1949No. 24518PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ERSKINE, District Judge.

I am- of the opinion that the plaintiff under the applicable law and under the facts is not entitled to recover in this action. It is plaintiff’s contention that he is entitled to recover upon two theories:

1. Under the general maritime law, because his injury, he claims, was brought about by the unseaworthiness of the vessel upon which he was employed at the time of his claimed injury; and

*3382. Even if his recovery under the general maritime law is barred by laches he is entitled to recover for negligence of-the defendants which he claims was- the proximate cause of his…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Seas Shipping Co. v. SierackiSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
  2. Western Fuel Co. v. GarciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  3. Cosmopolitan Shipping Co. v. McAllisterSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  4. International Stevedoring Co. v. HavertySupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  5. Caldarola v. EckertSupreme Court of the United States · 1947

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Continental Cas. Co. v. Thorden Line the Benny SkouCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1951
  2. Czaplicki v. The Hoegh SilvercloudDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1953
  3. Thomson v. Alcoa S. S. Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1950
  4. Culley v. WillardDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1956

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

Powered by the Exa API