Puget Sound Tug & Barge Co. v. the Go Getter
District Court, D. Oregon
1Opinion of the Court
McCOLLOCH, District Judge.
Claiming that a new statute, 28 U.S.C.A. § 1404(a) (Forum non Conveniens), applies to admiralty, respondents obtained the transfer of these proceedings from Tacoma, Washington, and I have before me a motion to docket the case on the admiralty calendar.
Because of my own interest, I have made, some search of the authorities and, while the question may be regarded as close, I have concluded that 1404(a) was not intended to apply to admiralty. In this conclusion I find myself in disagreement with two Dis trict Judges, 1 who have held to the contrary. St. Paul Fire &…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- United States v. National City Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- United States v. National City Lines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Atkins v. Disintegrating Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1874
- United States v. National City Lines, Inc.District Court, S.D. California · 1948
- Orr v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Sun Oil Co. v. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1952
- Petition of BackmanDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1954
- Hercules Company v. S/S AramisDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1964
- Texas Co. v. United StatesDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1953
- Kinsman Transit Co. v. Dunham Towing & Wrecking Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1953
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.