Maclay v. United States
United States Court of Claims
The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. In the year 1898 the claimants, Joseph Patón Maclay, Thomas Walker McIntyre, and William Murray Mackinley were British subjects, residing in Glasgow, Scotland, and were copartners engaged in business under the firm name of Maclay & McIntyre, and were the owners of the British steamship Nyanza, her gross tonnage being 4,053 tons and her net register tonnage 2,643 tons.
Read the full summary
The Reporters’ statement of the case: The following are the facts of this case as found by the court: I. In the year 1898 the claimants, Joseph Patón Maclay, Thomas Walker McIntyre, and William Murray Mackinley were British subjects, residing in Glasgow, Scotland, and were copartners engaged in business under the firm name of Maclay & McIntyre, and were the owners of the British steamship Nyanza, her gross tonnage being 4,053 tons and her net register tonnage 2,643 tons. It appears by stipulation of counsel, filed herein December 5, 1907, that William Murray Mackinley, of said firm, departed…
1Opinion of the CourtAtkinson, J.
The owners of the steamship Nyanza, who are subjects of Great Britain, bring this suit to recover damages by way of demurrage for detention of said steamer while unloading a cargo of coal consigned under a bill of lading to the naval forces of the United States at Manili, P. I., during the months of July, August, and September, 1898, and certain other alleged losses incident to such detention.
May 13, 1898, the plaintiffs chartered their steamship Nyanza to Henry J. Withers, of Australia, to convey a cargo of coal from New South Wales, Australia, to one of several points mentioned at or near…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- North American Transportation & Trading Co. v. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Dayton v. . ParkeNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
- Harper v. MillerIndiana Supreme Court · 1866
- Cuddy v. MajorMichigan Supreme Court · 1864
- Bridges v. LanhamNebraska Supreme Court · 1883
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Yankee Atomic Electric Company v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2013