Legal Opinion
Brazil Oiticica, Ltd. v. the Bill
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided June 8, 1944No. 2533PublishedCited by 38 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CHESNUT, District Judge.
The above case is a libel in rem to recover for a cargo loss. An opinion in the case with respect to liability was filed November 28, 1942 (47 F.Supp. 969) with the final paragraph of the opinion, page 979, reading as follows:
“The monetary damage to the libelant by the loss of the oil has not yet been established in evidence. Possibly the parties may be able to stipulate that amount without the necessity of further proof. But if there is no agreement as to the amount, counsel can at an early mutually convenient hearing submit the relevant evidence. If an interlocutory…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- The Ansaldo San Giorgio I v. Rheinstrom Brothers Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1935
- Brazil Oiticica, Ltd. v. the BillDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1942
- Smith v. the FerncliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- The Steel InventorDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1940
- The FerncliffDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1938
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by38 opinions
- Waterman S. S. Corp. v. United States Smelting, Refining & Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1946
- Petition of Isbrandtsen Company, Inc. Isbrandtsen Co., Inc. v. United States. The Edmund FanningCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1953
- Mitsui & Co., Ltd. And Ataka & Co., Ltd., Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross v. American Export Lines, Inc., Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant. Armstrong Cork Canada, Ltd., and Armstrong Cork Company v. American Export Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Mitsui & Co. v. American Export Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- A. M. Collins & Co. v. Panama R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1952
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.