Legal Opinion

A. L. Mechling Barge Lines, Inc. v. Derby Company, Ltd.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided August 5, 1968No. 24329PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Per curiam

We agree with the holding below and adopt the district court’s opinion (“findings of fact and conclusions of law”) as the opinion of this Court. See 258 F.Supp. 206 (1966). We consider that Bisso v. Inland Waterways Corp., 1955, 349 U.S. 85, 75 S.Ct. 629, 99 L.Ed. 911 and Dixilyn Drilling Corp. v. Crescent Towing & Salvage Co., 1963, 372 U.S. 697, 83 S.Ct. 967, 10 L.Ed.2d 78, are relevant, if not necessarily controlling. We recognize the difference between negligence and unseaworthiness and between a private carrier and a common carrier. But we are dealing here with the construction of an…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bisso v. Inland Waterways Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
  2. Dixilyn Drilling Corp. v. Crescent Towing & Salvage Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1963
  3. Derby Company v. AL Mechling Barge Lines, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1966

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. King Fisher Marine Service, Inc. v. The Np Sunbonnet, Her Engines, Etc., and Newpark Marine Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1984
  2. Consolidated Grain & Barge Company v. Marcona Conveyor Corporation, Marcona Sales, Inc. v. Consolidated Grain & Barge CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
  3. McDonough Marine Service, Inc. v. M/V Royal StreetDistrict Court, E.D. Louisiana · 1979
  4. Massman Construction Co. v. Sioux City & New Orleans Barge Lines, Inc.District Court, W.D. Missouri · 1979
  5. CONSOL. GRAIN & BARGE CO. v. Wisconsin Barge LineDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1981

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API