The Princess Sophia
District Court, W.D. Washington
1Opinion of the CourtNeterer, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). In the argument before the court and the briefs presented the claimants strongly contend that limitation was unwarranted, and that in the consideration of damages the court should consider the acts of omission and commission leading to the casualty, and that the conscience of the court should assess damages in accordance with right, and that the court is not bound by the strict rules of law with relation to the assessment of damages, and that interest should be charged from date of death.
In considering the commissioner’s report and the exceptions, the court…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- The HarrisburgSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Dennick v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1881
- Western Fuel Co. v. GarciaSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- St. Louis, San Francisco & Texas Railway Co. v. SealeSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
- The Max MorrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Haakanson v. Wakefield Seafoods, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1979
- The S. S. SamovarDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1947
- Kulawik v. ERA Jet AlaskaAlaska Supreme Court · 1991
- The ManduDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1937
- Wien Alaska Airlines, Inc. v. SimmondsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.