Legal Opinion
Di Meglio v. The Black Condor
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 13, 1954PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
IRVING R. KAUFMAN, District Judge.
The impleaded-respondent is a time charterer. On February 3, 1954, 120 F. Supp. 909, Judge Weinfeld sustained the impleaded-respondent’s exceptions to the original impleading petition, granting leave to the vessel owner, the claimant-respondent, to plead anew, basing its claim either upon an express or implied contract of indemnity, and further directing that any amended petition should clarify the status of the Federal Stevedoring Company, the libellant’s employer, who, the claimant-respondent asserts, was the agent of the impleaded-respondent. The vessel…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Halcyon Lines v. Haenn Ship Ceiling & Refitting Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Dioguardi v. DurningCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1944
- McFall v. Compagnie Maritime Belge (Lloyd Royal) S. A.New York Court of Appeals · 1952
- Di Meglio v. Black CondorDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1954
3Cited by5 opinions
- United States v. $39,000 in Canadian CurrencyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1986
- Famous Rogers v. United States Lines Company, and Third-Party v. E. J. Lavino & Company, Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1962
- Crumady v. The Joachim Hendrik FisserDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1956
- Allen v. States Marine Corp.District Court, S.D. New York · 1955
- United States Court of Appeals, Tenth CircuitCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1986