Legal Opinion

The Apurimac

District Court, E.D. Virginia

Decided February 15, 1925PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GRONER, District Judge.

From the Bench: In the Roxen Case, 7 F.(2d) 739, 1925 A. M. C. 190, I dismissed the libel because the cause of action there asserted involved a controversy between the master of the ship and a seaman concerning a matter of internal discipline or discipline aboard the ship. The point involved in that ease was that the Seamen’s Act (38 Stat. 1164) conferred jurisdiction and made it obligatory on the court to-assume jurisdiction. I held to the contrary as to this point. The view that I have always entertained as to the exercise of jurisdiction in eases like this is that…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. The " Scotland"Supreme Court of the United States · 1882
  2. The Hanna NielsenCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
  3. Port of New York Stevedoring Corp. v. CastagnaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
  4. The ColusaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1918
  5. The RoxenDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1925

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Canada Malting Co. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
  2. Pettersen v. The Bertha BrovigDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API