Galle v. Hamburg Amerikanische Packetfahrt Actien Gesellschaft
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Action by Edward C. Galle and others against the Hamburg Amerikanische Backetfahrt Actien Gesellschaft. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring error.
Read the full summary
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Action by Edward C. Galle and others against the Hamburg Amerikanische Backetfahrt Actien Gesellschaft. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring error. This action was brought to recover for injury to certain cheese laden on steamship Hamburg, belonging to defendant in error, and alleged in the complaint to have been damaged “through the negligence and carelessness of the defendant in stowing- and carrying them.” The case was by stipulation tried without a jury, .and the judge found as a fact that…
1Opinion of the Court
HOUGH, District Judge.
[1,2] This being a common-law action, the findings of fact of the trial judge have the effect of a verdict, and the weight of evidence is not a subject of consideration in this court. Flagler v. Kidd, 78 Fed. 341, 24 C. C. A. 123; Kruger v. Constable, 128 Fed. 908, 63 C. C. A. 634; Schmid v. Dohan, 167 Fed. 804, 93 C. C. A. 194; Edenborn v. Sim, 206 Fed. 275, 124 C. C. A. 339. There was evidence that the tank in question did not leak until after live or six days of heavy weather had been encountered. This alone is sufficient to have required the submission of the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Davis v. WakeleeSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Railway Co. v. McCarthySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Goodman v. PurnellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1911
- Flagler v. KiddCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1897
- Edenborn v. SimCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1913
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- G. Amsinck & Co. v. Springfield Grocer Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1925
- Continental Nat. Bank v. National City Bank of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1934
- Second Nat. Bank of Allegheny v. Lash Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1924
- C. C. Mengel & Bro. Co. v. Handy Chocolate Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1926
- Spitzer v. Board of Trustees for Regina Public School Dist. No. 4 of SaskatchewanCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1920
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.