Legal Opinion

Luckenbach S. S. Co. v. Central Argentine Co.

District Court, S.D. New York

Decided May 7, 1924PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LEARNED HAND, ’District Judge.

The first case comes

up upon a reargument, which I ordered after sustaining the exception to jurisdiction. It was occasioned by further reflection, induced by the argument of the second case. I remain of the same opinion as then as to the necessity of some maritime contract, when the respondent seeks to implead a third party, between whom and the libelant no direct relation exists. The point which I did not consider at the time was that the libelant could have sued the party impleaded directly in the admiralty under the charter party. That being the case, the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Erie Railroad v. Erie & Western Transportation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1907
  2. The Ira M. HedgesSupreme Court of the United States · 1910

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Atlantic Coast Line R. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.District Court, M.D. Georgia · 1943
  2. Lucky-Goldstar, Int'l (America) Inc. v. Phibro Energy International, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1992
  3. Lamborn & Co. v. Compania Maritima Del NervionDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1927
  4. Rudy-Patrick Seed Co. v. Kokusai Kisen Kabushiki KaishaDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1932
  5. Alphamate Commodity GMBH v. CHS EUROPE SACourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2010

10 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