Legal Opinion · Dissent

Eastern S. S. Corp. v. Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.

Court of Appeals for the First Circuit

Decided March 7, 1919No. Nos. 1354, 1355Published

i ^Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts; James M. Morton, Judge, Petition to limit liability by the Great Uakes Dredge & Dock Company, to which the Eastern Steamship Corporation, as damage claimant, filed an answer. From a decree (250 Fed. 916), both parties appeal.

1DissentAnderson, Circuit Judge

In the conclusion that the dredge company is not entitled to limit its liability I concur. From the reasoning of the foregoing opinion I am constrained to dissent; I think it lays down propositions unsound and fraught with serious danger.(1) I do not think this drillboat was a vessel within the meaning of the limited liability acts. I think the weight of authority and of sound argument is that it was not a vessel.

*506R. S. § 3, defines a vessel as follows:

“The word ‘vessel’ includes every description of water craft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Abilene Cotton Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. La BourgogneSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
  3. Norwich Co. v. WrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
  4. Providence & New York Steamship Co. v. Hill Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1883
  5. Willamette Iron Bridge Co. v. HatchSupreme Court of the United States · 1888

24 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