Legal Opinion
Stokes v. United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided July 13, 1944No. 406PublishedCited by 58 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRANK, Circuit Judge.
1. Respondent contends that the libellant’s damage was caused by his own negligence in ñot discharging his duty, as representative of the owner, to examine the governor and put it in seaworthy condition, and that therefore he cannot make that neglect of that duty the basis of his claim, citing United States Steel Products Co. v. Noble, 2 Cir., 10 F.2d 89. Assuming for the moment that, as found by the trial judge, libellant was guilty of negligence, we cannot agree with respondent’s contention. For there is sufficient evidence that the flywheel was defective, and that, if…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Fleming v. PalmerCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1941
- Equitable Life Assur. Soc. v. IrelanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1941
- Coastwise Transp. Corp. v. Charles Nelson Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- United States v. MitchellCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1939
- Midwood Associates, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by58 opinions
- Orvis v. HigginsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1950
- Colby v. KluneCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1949
- John R. McWeeney v. New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1960
- Floyd v. Fruit Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
- Robert L. Turcotte, Administrator of the Estate of Gerard P. Turcotte v. Ford Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1974
53 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.