Legal Opinion

The Noddleburn

United States Circuit Court

Decided February 8, 1887PublishedCited by 5 opinions

In Admiralty. Suit for damages and wages. Appeal from district court. Decree in 28 Fed. Rep. 855, affirmed*

1Opinion of the Court

SawyeR, ,T.

The bark Noddlebum is a British vessel, and the claimant, master, and libelant are British subjects. Although the point as to the jurisdiction of the court over the subject-matter does not appear to have been much relied on in the district court, it is quite earnestly pressed here. Under the authorities cited by the district judge, and the reasoning found in them, I think there can be little doubt that the court had jurisdiction. All actions for injuries ex delicto to the person, and actions on contracts, are transitory, and may generally be maintained ■wherever the parties may be…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. The BelgenlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
  2. Bernhard v. CreeneDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 1874

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Mahnich v. Southern Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. Canada Malting Co. v. Paterson Steamships, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1932
  3. The Hanna NielsenDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1928
  4. Pouppirt v. Elder Dempster Shipping, Ltd.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1903
  5. Bucker v. KlorkgeterDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1849

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

Powered by the Exa API