Legal Opinion
Sacramento Navigation Co. v. Salz
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided February 21, 1927No. 51PublishedCited by 171 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Sutherland
This appeal involves the construction and application of § 3 of the Harter Act, c. 105, 27 Stat. 445, which, so far as pertinent here, provides: “That if the owner of any vessel transporting merchandise or property to or from any port in the United States of America shall exercise due diligence to make the said vessel in all respects seaworthy and properly manned, eqüipped, and supplied, neither the vessel, her owner or owners, agent, or charterers shall become or be held responsible for damage or loss resulting from faults or errors in navigation or in the management of said vessel . . .”
Peti…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. HartwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1868
- The Main v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- United States v. CorbettSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Liverpool, Brazil & River Plate Steam Navigation Co. v. Brooklyn Eastern District TerminalSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
- Short v. The ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1896
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by171 opinions
- Atlantic Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Helvering v. Stockholms Enskilda BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Bowers v. Lawyers Mortgage Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Osaka Shosen Kaisha Line v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Marion Lee Avera and Daniel J. Avera v. Florida Towing Corporation, Florida Towing Corporation v. Marion Lee Avera and Daniel J. AveraCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1963
166 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.