Legal Opinion
Luddco 41 v. Wilmington Boat Works, Inc.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided September 16, 1933No. 7012PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MACK, Circuit Judge.
From a decree against the Luddeo 41 in favor of Wilmington Boat Works, Inc., libelant, claimant Lake Union Dry Dock & Machine Works appeals.
The Luddeo 41 was constructed by appellant at Seattle, Wash., and on completion was shipped by it to the Yacht & Motor Sales Corporation, at Los Angeles, on consignment for purpose of sale. Sales Corporation was to uso the boat only for demonstration runs and to defray the expenses of its upkeep until a sale was effected. While in possession of the Sales Corporation, the boat began to leak badly and its motor proved rather noisy. By…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- United States v. CarverSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
- McKelvey v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- New Bedford Dry Dock Co. v. PurdySupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- The South CoastSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- The Henry W. BreyerDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 1927
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Dampskibsselskabet Dannebrog v. Signal Oil & Gas Co. of Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Eagle Star & British Dominions v. TadlockDistrict Court, S.D. California · 1938
- Dampskibsselskabet Dannebrog v. Signal Oil & Gas Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1939
- The PajalaDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1934
- Signal Oil & Gas Co. v. Dampskibsselskabet DannebrogDistrict Court, W.D. Washington · 1938