Legal Opinion
Krauss Bros. Lumber Co. v. Dampski Skibsselskabet Norden Aktieselskab
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided April 19, 1933Published
1Opinion of the Court
CAFFEY, District Judge.
On the authority of Pacific Can Company v. Williams Steamship Corporation, 1933 A. M. C. 115,1 the second exception is sustained.
I am unable to pass upon the first exception. The phraseology of the notice and suit provisions of the bills of lading have not been put before me. I have three times searched what purports to be a photostat copy which, by stipulation, has been added to the libel; but in it I do not find the clauses discussed at the oral argument. This may be due to the *1015fact that the photostat is in large part wholly illegible.
The first exception is overruled,…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Louisiana & Western Railroad v. GardinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Straus v. FoxworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- Bank of California, N. A. v. International Mercantile Marine Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
- Cudahy Packing Co. v. Munson S. S. LineCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
- Green Star S. S. Co. v. Nanyang Bros. Tobacco Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1925
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.