The Granite State
District Court, D. Massachusetts
This 'was a suit in rem, promoted by James Reeder, Jr., of Baltimore, for repairs and materials furnished to the vessel in Baltimore, in September last. Richard F. Loper, of Philadelphia, intervened for his interest, as owner.
Read the full summary
This 'was a suit in rem, promoted by James Reeder, Jr., of Baltimore, for repairs and materials furnished to the vessel in Baltimore, in September last. Richard F. Loper, of Philadelphia, intervened for his interest, as owner. The defence was, that at the time the supplies were furnished the vessel, she was mortgaged to the claimant, for her full value; and that after the supplies were furnished, and before this suit was brought, the vessel had been decreed by this court to him, upon a suit in rem, for possession, for condition broken.
1Opinion of the Court
SPRAGUE, District Judge.
A sale of a vessel by a decree in rem, in admiralty, gives a perfect title to the purchaser, and the holders of liens are remitted to the funds in the registry, which are substituted for the vessel. But the decree relied upon was not for' a sale of the vessel. It only gave possession to the mortgagee. It did not even pass upon the general title.’ In a mere suit of possession, holders of liens are not required to come in and defend; nor is it apparent what defence to the transfer of possession could be made by them, if they were to intervene. The decree, therefore, does…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Hammond v. DanielsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1879
- Jones v. KeenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Dunklee v. CraneMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Putnam v. The Young AmericaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1887
- Smith v. StevensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1886
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.