Legal Opinion

Eckert v. Socony Vacuum Oil Co.

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided October 2, 1935No. 33PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DICKINSON, District Judge.

We wish first to make an acknowledgment for the very helpful argument with which wc have been favored by the proctors in this cause.

The final ruling rests on the very narrow ground of the verbiage of the Jones Act (section 33 [46 U.S.C.A. § 688]), but it takes into its scope the underlying principles of the maritime law. Blackstone has made familiar to all of tts a canon of construction of statutes which is very illuminating and helpful. It is to consider “the old law, the mischief and the remedy.”

The libelant has suffered injuries to his person, redress for which he…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Panama Railroad v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
  2. Stein v. Standard Oil Co. of CaliforniaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1929
  3. Bannon v. Seaboard Air Line Ry. Co.District Court, S.D. Georgia · 1930
  4. McDaniel v. Baker Sand & Gravel Co., Inc.District Court, S.D. Alabama · 1928

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Brown v. C. D. Mallory & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1941
  2. Brown v. C. D. Mallory & Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1940
  3. Finberg v. SullivanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1978
  4. Bennett v. Standard Oil Co. of New JerseyDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1940
  5. McKola v. McCormick S. S. Co.District Court, N.D. California · 1938

2 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