The Ninfa
District Court, D. Oregon
In Admiralty. Suit for damage to cargo. Libelants chartered the ship Ninfa (J. A. Marosea & Sons being the owners) for tlie carriage of a cargo of cement and other lawful merchandise from London. England, to the port of Los Angeles, Cal., and Portland, Or. The charter party contained the ordinary warranty that the ship was tight, staunch, and strong, and In every way fit aud seaworthy for the carriage of tlie cargo upon the voyage contemplated.
Read the full summary
In Admiralty. Suit for damage to cargo. Libelants chartered the ship Ninfa (J. A. Marosea & Sons being the owners) for tlie carriage of a cargo of cement and other lawful merchandise from London. England, to the port of Los Angeles, Cal., and Portland, Or. The charter party contained the ordinary warranty that the ship was tight, staunch, and strong, and In every way fit aud seaworthy for the carriage of tlie cargo upon the voyage contemplated. When the ship arrived at Los Angeles, a large part of the cargo was discharged at that port, and was found to have been seriously damaged by contact…
1Opinion of the CourtWOlyVKRTON, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). It has been made a question as to what bearing the Harter act has upon the determination of this controversy. The respondent maintains that it has a distinct and persuasive bearing, while the libelants, upon the other hand, put it beside the case, and assert that, under its proper construction, it is without important application, in view of the facts as substantiated by the evidence. In this relation I will make some inquiry as to the state of the law prior to the adoption of the Harter act and the causes that led up to its enactment.
Where not qualified or…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- The SilviaSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
- The CaledoniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- The Edwin I. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- The DelawareSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
- International Navigation Co. v. Farr & Bailey Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Compagnie Maritime Francaise v. MeyerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1918
- The R. P. FitzgeraldCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1914
- Navigazone Libera Triestina v. Garcia & Maggini Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1929
- Pan-American Trading Co. v. FranquizDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1925
- The Pehr UglandDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1921
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.