The Oregon v. Pittsburgh & L. A. Iron Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the '.Northern District of Ohio. In Admiralty. Libels by the Pittsburgh & Lake Angdine Iron Company against the propeller Oregon and others and against the, schooner Palms. There were decrees in the district court for libel-ant, which were affirmed on appeal by the circuit court. From' the latter decrees respondents appeal.
1Opinion of the Court
TAFT, Circuit Judge,
(after stating the facts.) It is contended by appellants that the provisions of the charters that the vessels should make as many trips as possible did not prevent them from towing other vessels on their trips, because it was the custom for a propeller like the Oregon, to tow two, three, and sometimes as many as five, vessels at a time. We do not see how such a custom could affect the construction to be placed, on this contract. It may be very true that propellers of the power and tonnage of the Oregon are in the habit of towing three, four, and five vessels, but they do…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Ward v. New York Central RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Bracket v. M'NairNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Walsh v. RogersSupreme Court of the United States · 1852
- O'Conner v. ForsterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1840
- Ogden v. . MarshallNew York Court of Appeals · 1853
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Krauss Bros. Lumber v. Dimon Steamship Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Hellenic Lines, Ltd., Cross-Appellee v. United States of America, and Commodity Credit Corporation, Cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
- The Capitaine FaureCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
- Cheatham v. Wheeling & L. E. Ry. Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1930
- Grimwood v. Munson S. S. LineCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.