Legal Opinion
O'DOnnell Transp. Co., Inc. v. City of New York. The Kosciusko. The Don. The Anna F. O'DOnnell
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided July 6, 1954No. 23020_1PublishedCited by 55 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HARLAN, Circuit Judge.
This appeal challenges the propriety of so much of a final decree in admiralty as failed to allow interest on the amount of libellant’s recovery.
The libellant, as charterer in possession of the barges “Kosciusko,” “Don” and “Anna F. O’Donnell,” instituted this action on February 28, 1948, in the District Court for the Eastern District of New York to recover damages for injuries allegedly inflicted upon those barges by reason of respondent’s negligence on various dates between February 7 and April 22, 1946. Thereafter, respondent propounded certain interrogatories to be…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- The President MadisonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1937
- The WrightCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
- Dyer and Others v. National Steam Nav. CoSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- In re HibbardCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
- Pennsylvania R. v. Naam Looze Vennoot Schap, S. S. Willem Van Driel, Sr.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1919
3Cited by55 opinions
- West v. HarrisCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
- Earl E. Robinson v. Pocahontas, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1973
- Lekas & Drivas, Inc. v. GoulandrisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1962
- William Malbon, Jr. And Thomas M. Malbon, Partners, T/a Malbon Brothers Farm v. Pennsylvania Millers Mutual Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1980
- Mitsui & Co., Ltd. And Ataka & Co., Ltd., Plaintiffs-Appellants-Cross v. American Export Lines, Inc., Defendant-Appellee-Cross-Appellant. Armstrong Cork Canada, Ltd., and Armstrong Cork Company v. American Export Lines, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.