Legal Opinion
David E. Williams & Co. v. Sargent Barge Line, Inc.
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided May 13, 1932No. Nos. 12484, 12618PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAMPBELL, District Judge.
The two aboye entitled actions were by stipulation tried together, and as they both-arise out of the same happening, one opinion will suffice.
In the first above-entitled action, Pennsylvania Railroad Company and steamtug PRR No. 33 were, on the petition of Sargent Barge Line, Inc., respondent and claimant of the barge M. M. O’Brien, impleaded under the Fifty-Sixth Rule in Admiralty (28 USCA § 723).
The first above-entitled action is brought by the owner of the cargo- laden on the barge M. M. O’Brien, to recover for the alleged damage to a portion, and the loss of the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Stevens v. the White CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- The Clarence L. BlakesleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1917
- Doherty v. Pennsylvania R.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
- In Re Pennsylvania R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
- The Mary T. TracyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Valentine v. Pennsylvania RailroadDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1938
- United States v. Mobile Towing & Wrecking Co.District Court, S.D. Alabama · 1956
- MacKay v. Pennsylvania R.District Court, E.D. New York · 1937
- United States v. Wood Towing Corp.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 1942