Eastern Massachusetts Street Ry. Co. v. Transmarine Corp.
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
In the libel, after setting out that it was a New Jersey corporation engaged in operating and chartering steamships and was' the owner pro hae vice of the steamer Surico, and that the Pore River Coal Company was a Massachusetts corporation, the libelant alleged: (1) That on or about the 31st day of January, 1927, it chartered to the coal company “the full coal-carrying capacity of the steamer Surico for two consecutive voyages from Hampton Roads, Virginia, to discharging…
Read the full summary
In the libel, after setting out that it was a New Jersey corporation engaged in operating and chartering steamships and was' the owner pro hae vice of the steamer Surico, and that the Pore River Coal Company was a Massachusetts corporation, the libelant alleged: (1) That on or about the 31st day of January, 1927, it chartered to the coal company “the full coal-carrying capacity of the steamer Surico for two consecutive voyages from Hampton Roads, Virginia, to discharging berth alongside wharf of the Eastern Massachusetts Street Railway Company, Pore River, Quincy, in the State of…
1Opinion of the CourtBingham, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above).
We are satisfied that, on the evidence, the District Court did not err in finding the libelant was not at fault either in the manner or the means it employed in tying up the vessel to the wharf, or otherwise; that her breaking away was not due to an act of God or any unusual circumstance, either in the character of the weather or of the .tide, that could not reasonably have been foreseen and provided against; that the coal company broke its covenant to provide a proper and suitable berth, in that the one provided was unsuitable; and that it was liable,…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Ex Parte EastonSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- The AdaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1918
- Compagnie Francaise De Navigation a Vapeur v. BonnasseCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
- Aktieselsikabet Fido v. Lloyd BrazilieroCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- The PennsylvaniaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1907
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Berwind-White Coal Mining Co. v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1943
- Natasha, Inc. v. Evita Marine Charters, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1985
- Royal Insurance Company of America v. Pier 39 Limited Partnership, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
- Atlantic Coast Line R. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.District Court, M.D. Georgia · 1943
- Flota Maritima Browning De Cuba, Sociadad Anonima v. SnoblCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1966
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.