Kenzel v. Kirk
New York Supreme Court
The above respondent was a store-keeper in. Jersey City, dealing with vessels. The master of the schooner Moonlight came into his store and bought an outfit in provisions for the schooner, for a round voyage he was about making to the West Indies and other ports. The amount of the bill was $296.88. The bill was purchased in the name of the vessel, on a credit of three months.
Read the full summary
The above respondent was a store-keeper in. Jersey City, dealing with vessels. The master of the schooner Moonlight came into his store and bought an outfit in provisions for the schooner, for a round voyage he was about making to the West Indies and other ports. The amount of the bill was $296.88. The bill was purchased in the name of the vessel, on a credit of three months. Nothing was said at the time of the purchase by the master that he -was running the vessel on shares; nor did the plaintiff have any knowledge of the fact, but supposed he was dealing with the master of a vessel in need…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court, Clerke, P. Justice.
It will not be disputed, I presume, if the owner charters his vessel to the master for a certain period, he, covenanting to victual and man her at his own cost, is to be deemed the owner pro hac vice (Hallett agt. Col. Ins. Co., 8 J. R., 252;) and he, like any other charterer under similar circumstances, is alone responsible for supplies furnished for the intended voyage. But, it is contended on behalf of the plaintiff, where the transaction is not a positive chartering but a letting of the vessel on shares, although the master engaged with the owners to…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Ford v. CrockerNew York Supreme Court · 1866