Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bisso v. Inland Waterways Corp.

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided May 16, 1955No. 50Published

1Dissent

Mr. Justice Frankfurter, whom Mr. Justice Reed and Mr. Justice Burton join,

dissenting.

Drawing on its constitutional powers in matters maritime (Art. III, § 2), this Court has probably made as much substantive admiralty law through adjudication as has Congress by legislation. Indeed, not a little of legislation has displaced or modified the Court’s decisions. This creative judicial function of making admiralty law remains unimpaired, so that it is within the Court’s jurisdiction now to announce, as new doctrine, that tow and tug may not by agreement relieve the tug of liability for damage to…

2Cases cited49 opinions

  1. Wilburn Boat Co. v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
  2. Liverpool & Great Western Steam Co. v. Phenix InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  3. Railroad Co. v. LockwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
  4. Halcyon Lines v. Haenn Ship Ceiling & Refitting Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
  5. New Jersey Steam Navigation Company v. MERCHANTS'BANK.Supreme Court of the United States · 1848

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

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

Powered by the Exa API