Legal Opinion

The Frank S. Hall

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided March 21, 1904No. 50PublishedCited by 2 opinions

In Admiralty. Suit for collision. On motion to divide costs.

1Opinion of the Court

J. B. McPHERSON, District Judge.

As is well known, when a collision is due to the fault of both vessels the damages are equally divided, whether one vessel or both have been injured, and I see no reason why, in the ordinary case, the costs should not be divided according to the same rule. They may be fairly regarded as part of the damages, for they are incurred in the effort to discover who is liable for the injury, and are therefore a sufficiently direct result of the collision. The injury done to each party is increased by the sum that he is compelled to expend in litigating the suit, and in…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. The " America."Supreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. Chisholm v. AbbottCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1896
  3. Philadelphia & R. R. Co. v. Warren Foundry & Machine Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1884
  4. The Mary PattenDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1872
  5. Union Ice Co. v. CrowellCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1893

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Jett v. Texas Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1948
  2. The Garden CityDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1916

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

Powered by the Exa API