Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Karoo

District Court, D. Washington

Decided February 15, 1892PublishedCited by 4 opinions

In Admiralty. Suit to recover seamen’s wages.

1Opinion of the Court

Hanford, District Judge.

I have very carefully read the testimony and given consideration to the pleadings in this case, and am now ready to announce my conclusions.

I think the court is justified, and in fact required, to take jurisdiction of this case, although it is a suit for seamen’s wages against a foreign vessel, for three reasons: (1) There is no British consul at the port of Tacoma, and the consul at Port Townsend, where the nearest consul resides, after being called upon to investigate and adjust the matters of difference between the master and crew, made no response to the request of…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Canada Malting Co. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. The EsterDistrict Court, E.D. South Carolina · 1911
  3. The August BelmontDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · 1907
  4. The BelvidereDistrict Court, S.D. Alabama · 1898

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API