Legal Opinion

Fitzsimmons v. Baxter

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided December 15, 1869PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal by the defendant, Baxter, from a judgment of the general term of the Marine Court, affirming a judgment of that court at trial term. The action was brought against the defendant, Baxter, “ and owners of ship Ann Gray,” for seaman’s wages. The plaintiff shipped on board the “ Ann Gray ” at Genoa, Italy, for a voyage, which had not terminated at the time the action was brought.

Read the full summary

Appeal by the defendant, Baxter, from a judgment of the general term of the Marine Court, affirming a judgment of that court at trial term. The action was brought against the defendant, Baxter, “ and owners of ship Ann Gray,” for seaman’s wages. The plaintiff shipped on board the “ Ann Gray ” at Genoa, Italy, for a voyage, which had not terminated at the time the action was brought. By the shipping articles, the plaintiff agreed £C to be obedient to the lawful commands of the master or of any person who shall lawfully succeed him.” William Griffiths was the master of the vessel under whom the…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court.

Daly, F. J.

There are two objections to

the joinder of the owners of the ship and the master in an action for seamen’s wages. I. No action upon a contract can be maintained in the Marine Court against the owners of a vessel by that generic title alone. Their names as defendants must appear, that judgment may pass against them. By the lie-vised Statutes, vol. II, p. 347, a defendant, if his name is unknown, may be sued by a fictitious name; but the provision-does not apply to the Marine Court; nor can this court, under the power of amendment given by the code, remedy such a defect…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Van Bokkelin v. IngersollCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1830
  2. Ward v. AmesNew York Supreme Court · 1812
  3. Wysham v. RossenNew York Supreme Court · 1814
  4. United States v. HamiltonU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1818

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Smith v. OakesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1886

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

Powered by the Exa API