Jay St. Terminal No. 3
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Suit in admiralty by the Jewell Tea Company against the barge Jay Street Terminal No. 3, and others, with John Barton Payne, Director General of Railroads, impleaded. Decree for respondents (281 Fed. 275), and libelant appeals.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Suit in admiralty by the Jewell Tea Company against the barge Jay Street Terminal No. 3, and others, with John Barton Payne, Director General of Railroads, impleaded. Decree for respondents (281 Fed. 275), and libelant appeals. Libelant delivered to the Jay Street Terminal, owner of barge No. 3, a large quantity of coffee, expecting it to be transported by the Terminal (a partnership) from certain piers in Brooklyn to one of the vessels of the Southern Pacific Company, laden on said vessel, and carried…
1Opinion of the CourtHough, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The possible liability of the parties sued in personam does not require discussion nor opinion, because it must be admitted that, if the barge is not *280liable in rem, no responding party is liable. Nor is it profitable to inquire whether the shipment was with a special or general carrier, for the owners of the barge issued and libelants accepted a bill of lading, expressing the contract between shipper and carrier, no matter of which kind. That bill of lading contains the exception that—
“No carrier shall be liable for any loss or damage resulting from * * »•…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- The RosaliaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
- The Kathryn B. GuinanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1910
3Cited by1 opinion
- Robert A. Munroe Co. v. Chesapeake Lighterage & Towing Co.District Court, D. Maryland · 1922