Legal Opinion

Woodward v. The Piskataqua

District Court, E.D. New York

Decided June 16, 1888PublishedCited by 3 opinions

In Admiralty.

1Opinion of the CourtBenedict, J.

These actions were tried together. They are brought to recover for damages to a cargo of dry ox hides, cow hides, and skins received during a voyage of the bark Piskataqua from Montevideo to New York. The only question presented for determination is whether the vessel was seaworthy at the time she left the port of Montevideo. The contention of the libelants is that the vessel, when she sailed, stood in need of caulking; that one of her bow ports was in bad condition; and that it was by reason of her unseaworthy condition in those particulars that the acknowledged bad condition in which the…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. La Fernier v. Soo River Lighter & Wrecking Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1902
  2. Philadelphia & G. S. S. Co. v. McCauldinCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1913
  3. McCaldin v. Cargo of LumberDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1912

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

Powered by the Exa API