Legal Opinion

Baker v. The Big Jim

District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania

Decided May 4, 1894No. 60PublishedCited by 6 opinions

This was a libel by Baker and others against the marine pump Big Jim to recover wages.

1Opinion of the Court

BUTLER, District Judge.

The claim is for wages on the “Big Jim” a marine pump, resting on piles, driven in the ground under water at League Island. She was weighted with heavy ballast to keep her in place while at work. She was capable of being towed from place to place, where her services were needed, a.nd had been so towed. She was used to suck mud from the bottom of the water, or from scows alongside, and force it by steam power on the adjacent; land. A fuller description seems unnecessary. She had none of the characteristics, and was not capable of performing any of tbe services of a…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. EVANS v. STARBUCKDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1894

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Charles Barnes Co. v. One Dredge BoatDistrict Court, E.D. Kentucky · 1909
  2. Hitner Sons Co. v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1922
  3. Bethlehem Steel Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1964
  4. Muellerweisse v. Pile Driver E. O. A.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Michigan · 1894
  5. The Jim & BillDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1933

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

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

Powered by the Exa API