Legal Opinion

Haroco Co. v. the Tai Shan

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided March 31, 1953PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DIMOCK, District Judge.

Libelants in these suits had various interests in cargo carried on respondents’ ship Tai Shan bound from Taku Bar off the North China coast to North American continental ports. The cargo was damaged by fire while the ship was off the direct route from Taku Bar to North American ports. The “Fire Statute”, 46 U.S.C. § 182, has the general effect of absolving the ship from the consequences of fire. It is cargo’s contention that conduct of the ship in departing from the direct route amounted to an “unreasonable deviation” and that this deviation rendered the ship liable for…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Earle & Stoddart, Inc. v. Ellerman's Wilson Line, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  2. The IndrapuraDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1909
  3. Globe & Rutgers Fire Ins. Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
  4. Swift & Co. v. Furness, Withy & Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1898
  5. The IdaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1935

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Surrendra (Overseas) Private, Ltd. v. S.S. Hellenic HeroDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1963
  2. Francosteel Corp. v. N. v. Nederlandsch AmerikaanscheCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  3. American Metal Company v. M/V BELLEVILLEDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1968
  4. Mendes Junior International Co. v. the M/V Sokai MaruDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1991
  5. Frederick Cone & Co. v. the Tai ShanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API