Legal Opinion · Dissent

The President Arthur

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided April 9, 1928No. 233Published

1DissentL. Hand, Circuit Judge

There are two questions at issue — first, whether the acceptances were a payment; if not, whether their receipt by the libelant was a “waiver” (of) “his right to a lien * * * by agreement or otherwise.” If the claimant had not been a party to the acceptances, it may be assumed that they would have been a payment. Atlas S. S. Co. v. Colombian Land Co., 102 F. 358 (C. C. A. 2); N. Y. & Cuba S. S. Co. v. Texas Co., 282 F. 221 (C. C. A. 2); Hall v. Stevens, 116 N. Y. 201, 22 N. E. 374, 5 L. R. A. 802. If, on the other hand, it had agreed only to deliver its note, and had done' so, the note would…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Piedmont & Georges Creek Coal Co. v. Seaboard Fisheries Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1920
  2. Chicago & Alton Railroad v. Union Rolling Mill Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1884
  3. Cordova v. HoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1873
  4. The KimballSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
  5. The Bird of ParadiseSupreme Court of the United States · 1867

19 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