Legal Opinion

Matthias v. Beeche

District Court, E.D. New York

Decided November 9, 1901Published

In Admiralty:

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, District Judge.

In the'above actions, shipowners seek to recover a balance of unpaid charter hire, and the charterers libel *941the vessel for alleged nonfulfillment of the charter. The charterers pleaded false, but not fraudulent, representations respecting the speed of the vessel, which in fact preceded and are not embodied in the charter part)T, and are superseded by that instrument, in the absence of fraud or mutual mistake. This rule applies to usual contracts (Seitz v. Refrigerating Mach. Co., 141 U. S. 510, 12 Sup. Ct. 46, 35 L. Ed. 837 [see cases cited in the opinion]; De Witt v.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
  2. De Witt v. BerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  3. Wilson v. New United States Cattle-Ranch Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1896
  4. Union Nat. Bank v. German Ins.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1896
  5. Godkin v. MonahanCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1897

8 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