Legal Opinion

Cunard Steamship Co. v. Coates

Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Decided December 13, 1892No. Nos. 49, 51PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Motions to modify order for mandate.

1Per curiam

In these cases we conclude that, upon an affirmance by this court on an appeal from a decree of the district court in favor of the libelant, the libelant, when appellee, is entitled to interest on the whole decree, in the absence of special circumstances to induce the court to disallow interest. We adopt the rule followed in The Blenheim, 18 Fed. 47, and disapprove that followed in Deems v. Canal Line. 14 Blatchf. 474, believing the doctrine of The Blenheim to be founded on better reason.

As to costs, the appellant was put to the necessity of an appeal to secure a proper modification of the…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. The " Alabama " & the " Game-Cock."Supreme Court of the United States · 1876
  2. Deems v. Albany & Canal LineU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1878
  3. Ball v. WinslowU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1883

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Steamship Wellesley Co. v. C. A. Hooper & Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1911
  2. Arkansas Southern Railway Co. v. German National BankSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
  3. The StrathlevenCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1914

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

Powered by the Exa API