United States v. Moran Towing & Transportation Company, Incorporated, United States of America v. Bethlehem Steel Company
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
HAYNSWORTH, Chief Judge.
The controversy involves the duty and financial burden of removal of the broken hulk of what once was a floating dry *658dock. The United States contends that the financial burden rests upon Bethlehem Steel Company, the owner, and Moran Towing & Transportation Company, Incorporated whose tugs had the dock in tow, because, under the relevant statutes, the dry dock was not a vessel or craft, and, even if it was, that the burden is cast upon the owner and the tug owner, because the dry dock was intentionally grounded, as the District Court found, or, at least, the grounding…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Offshore Co. v. RobisonCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- United States v. Republic Steel Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1960
- Cope v. Vallette Dry Dock Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1887
- United States v. Perma Paving Co., Inc., and Anthony Rose, and Third-Party United States of America v. The City of New York, and Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1964
- Summerlin v. Massman Const. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1952
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Wyandotte Transportation Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Robert D. Cook v. Belden Concrete Products, Inc., Division of Rockwin CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- Willard H. Lane v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1975
- Complaint of the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston the University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
- Royal Insurance Company of America v. Pier 39 Limited Partnership, Etc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1984
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.