Legal Opinion
United States v. Charles Zubik
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided September 27, 1961No. 13516PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KALODNER, Circuit Judge.
Is the United States entitled to recover the cost of removing a wrecked vessel obstructing a navigable river from its owner who negligently sank the vessel and failed to remove it, after demand, in violation of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, as amended (“Act”). 1
That is the primary question, of first impression, presented by this appeal by reason of the negative answer given to it by the District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
The District Court granted the motion of the defendant Charles Zubik to dismiss the complaint of the United States seeking…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- United States v. Republic Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Willamette Iron Bridge Co. v. HatchSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- The ManhattanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1935
- Zubik v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1951
- The ManhattanDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1932
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- China Union Lines, Ltd., Mitsubishi International Corporation, Lan Jing-Chau, Armement Deppe, S.A. v. A. O. Andersen & Co., American Cyanamid CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
- United States v. Perma Paving Co., Inc., and Anthony Rose, and Third-Party United States of America v. The City of New York, and Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1964
- United States v. Moran Towing & Transportation Company, Incorporated, United States of America v. Bethlehem Steel CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1967
- United States v. Cargill, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1966
- Jones Towing, Inc. v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1967
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.