Legal Opinion

The William M. Hoag

Supreme Court of the United States

Decided December 6, 1897No. Nos. 137 and 138PublishedCited by 4 opinions

APPEALS FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF OREGON. The case is stated in the opinion.

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Brown

These cases differ from those already disposed of ante, 437, only in the fact that the libels contain claims by the masters of those vessels,with an averment that during the time they ivere employed there was an officer known as the purser; that the agents of the receiver and the purser collected and received, all the earnings from the vessels from both passengers and freight, and paid over such earnings in the ordinary course of business to the receiver; that none of the earnings of the vessels passed through the hands of the masters, and that their sole duties consisted in navigating the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. The Steamboat Orleans v. PhœbusSupreme Court of the United States · 1837

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Union Fish Co. v. EricksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1919
  2. Wandtke v. AndersonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1934
  3. Alabama Dry Dock & Shipbuilding Co. v. FosterCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1929
  4. The ElseDistrict Court, S.D. Alabama · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API