The Folmina
Supreme Court of the United States
CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE • SECOND CIRCUIT. The facts are stated in the opinion. The questions submitted to this court for answer in this cause are favorably controlled by The G. R. Booth, 171 U. S. 450. The only differences between the facts in that case and the facts in the instant case are differences which make the owner of cargo on the Folmina more clearly, entitled to redress than the owners of the cargo of the Booth.
Read the full summary
CERTIFICATE FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE • SECOND CIRCUIT. The facts are stated in the opinion. The questions submitted to this court for answer in this cause are favorably controlled by The G. R. Booth, 171 U. S. 450. The only differences between the facts in that case and the facts in the instant case are differences which make the owner of cargo on the Folmina more clearly, entitled to redress than the owners of the cargo of the Booth. In-the Booth case the carrier fully explained the entrance of the sea water; in-the present case the carrier either cannot or will not explain…
1Opinion of the CourtJustice White
delivered the opinion of the court..-
Upon the hearing of an appeal from a decree of the District Court, Eastern District of New York, dismissing a libel, the' Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit certified to this court for decision, pursuant to § 6 of the judiciary act of 1891, the following questions:
1. Whether damage to the cargo of an apparently seaworthy ship, through the unexplained admission pf sea water, in the absence of any proof" of fault on the" part of the. officers or crew of the ship, is of itself a sea peril within the meaning of an exception in a bill of lading…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Liverpool & Great Western Steam Co. v. Phenix InsuranceSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Clark v. BarnwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- The Edwin I. MorrisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Propeller Niagara v. CordesSupreme Court of the United States · 1859
- The G. R. BoothSupreme Court of the United States · 1898
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by130 opinions
- United States v. MayerSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
- Commercial Molasses Corp. v. New York Tank Barge Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Schnell v. the VallescuraSupreme Court of the United States · 1934
- The RosaliaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
- Waterman S. S. Corp. v. United States Smelting, Refining & Mining Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1946
125 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.