Legal Opinion
The C. E. Paul
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided September 1, 1909PublishedCited by 4 opinions
In Admiralty. Suit by the Newbold Whiting Company against the barge C. E. Paul.
1Opinion of the Court
RELLSTAB, District Judge.
During the night of the 33d, or the early- morning- of the 24th. of April, 1906, the barge of the libelant sank, with its cargo of chalk, while moored at its wharf in Big Timber creek, a navigable, tidewater stream. The barge had been so moored for several weeks prior thereto, awaiting the discharge of its cargo. No one was in charge at the time it sank, and no one testified to seeing it sink. Its sunken condition was discovered by the night watchman of the libelant, about 1 o’clock in the morning of the 34th.
On the 22d the claimant’s barge or scow C. E. Paul…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- The OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- The City of New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- The Ludvig HolbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Vantine v. The LakeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Pennsylvania · 1850
- The MexicoDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1897
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Burns Bros. v. Cornell Steamboat Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
- The ChancellorCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Erie R. v. Cornell No. 20Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
- The L. & W. B. C. Co. No. 11District Court, E.D. New York · 1943