The Bencleuch
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the CourtHand, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The damage done upon the ship must be distinguished from that done in the slings and on the piers. The first was of two kinds, breakage and decay, against both of which the bills of lading contained exceptions. Therefore, since the ship had showed that the loss was within the exceptions, the *51libelant must prove some negligence on the ship’s part. Nelson v. Woodruff, 1 Black, 159, 17 L. Ed. 97. The Harter Act (Comp. St. §§ 8029-8035) has nothing to do with this situation. There was no attempt in the bills of lading to exempt the ship from liability for…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Nelson v. WoodruffSupreme Court of the United States · 1862
- Anchor Line (Henderson Bros.), Ltd. v. JacksonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- Mercantile Bank of Americas, Inc. v. Panama RailroadCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
- The ArpillaoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
- The St. QuentinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1908
3Cited by18 opinions
- Cudahy Packing Co. v. Munson S. S. LineCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
- The West ArrowCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1936
- Vacuum Oil Co. v. Rotterdamsche LloydCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- The Milwaukee BridgeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
- The Texas MaruCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.