Legal Opinion
Navigazone Libera Triestina v. Garcia & Maggini Co.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided January 14, 1929No. 5522PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGilbert, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
The appellant contends that the record conclusively established that the appellant did exercise reasonable moans to make the ventilating fan system seaworthy, and points to the evidence that the chief engineer of the vessel joined it during its building and was put aboard to see the mounting of the motors, and remained with the ship from that time until the end of the voyage; that prior to departing from Trieste he inspected the ventilating system and fan and surveyed all parts thereof, and before installing the same inspected the material of all portions…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- The Edwin I. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- The FolminaSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- International Navigation Co. v. Farr & Bailey Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1901
- The GermanicSupreme Court of the United States · 1905
- The WildcroftSupreme Court of the United States · 1906
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Waterman S. S. Corp. v. United States Smelting, Refining & Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1946
- General Motors Corp. v. the OlanchoDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1953
- Petition of Reliance Marine Transp. & Const. Corp. The M. J. WoodsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1953
- Watson v. Providence Washington Ins. Co.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 1952
- California & Hawaiian Sugar Refining Corp. v. RideoutCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1931
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.