Legal Opinion
The Speybank
District Court, D. Maryland
Decided September 21, 1928No. 1627PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WILLIAM C. COLEMAN,
District Judge. This case arises on an exception filed to an amended libel on the ground that it does not set forth any matters sufficient to constitute a cause of action, entitling the li-belant to recover; or, stated.more specifically, that there is nothing in the amended libel to indicate what, if any, interest the libelant has in the property alleged to have been damaged, and that therefore libelant is not entitled to bring the action.
The original libel, filed April 5, 1928, alleges a cause in tort by the United States Steel Products Company against the motor vessel…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- The ThamesSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- The Vaughan and TelegraphSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- National Interocean Corp. v. Emmons Coal Mining Corp.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1921
- Cragin & Co. v. International S. S. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
3Cited by6 opinions
- The Nichiyo MaruCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1937
- Aunt Jemima Mills Co. v. Lloyd Royal BelgeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- Petition of New Jersey Barging CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1958
- Royston Distributors, Inc. v. Moore-McCormack Lines, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1965
- Toyo Kisen Kabushiki Kaisha v. WellmanCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.