Murray v. Aetna Ins.
U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois
Assumpsit [by James Murray against the Aetna Insurance Company of Hartford] for loss of freight money.
1Opinion of the Court
DRUMMOND, District Judge.
I am of opinion as a matter of law that the plaintiff cannot recover in this case.
The contract the defendant made was that the vessel should earn or be entitled to freight, and in the case of loss of freight or if the plaintiff was not entitled to receive freight in consequence of some accident or misfortune within the terms of the policy, then the defendant agreed to become responsible. The question is whether, according to the terms of the contract, the defendant is liable.
Fifteen thousand bushels of com, in the fall of 1SG2, were shipped on board the schooner owned…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- The Nathaniel HooperU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1839
- Saltus v. Ocean InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Griswold v. New-York InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1806
- C. W. Adams & Co. v. HaughtTexas Supreme Court · 1855
- Hugg v. Baltimore & Cuba Smelting & Mining Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1872
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Braithwaite v. AikinNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1891