Armour & Company, Libelant-Appellee v. Compania Argentina De Navegacion Dodero, S.A.

263 F.2d 323
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit
DecidedFebruary 4, 1959
Docket25056_1
StatusPublished

This text of 263 F.2d 323 (Armour & Company, Libelant-Appellee v. Compania Argentina De Navegacion Dodero, S.A.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Armour & Company, Libelant-Appellee v. Compania Argentina De Navegacion Dodero, S.A., 263 F.2d 323 (2d Cir. 1959).

Opinion

263 F.2d 323

ARMOUR & COMPANY, Libelant-Appellee,
v.
COMPANIA ARGENTINA DE NAVEGACION DODERO, S.A., Respondent-Appellant.

No. 90.

Docket 25056.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued January 9, 1959.

Decided February 4, 1959.

Donald B. Allen, of Hill, Betts & Nash, New York City, for respondent-appellant.

F. Herbert Prem, of Bigham, Englar, Jones & Houston, New York City, for libelant-appellee.

Before CLARK, Chief Judge, MOORE, Circuit Judge, and GIBSON, District Judge.

PER CURIAM.

On this appeal respondent challenges only certain findings of fact of the trial court, made as a part of a reasoned opinion. Such findings may be upset only if clearly erroneous. F.R. 52 (a); McAllister v. United States, 348 U.S. 19, 75 S.Ct. 6, 99 L.Ed. 20; A. H. Bull S.S. Co. v. The Exanthia, 2 Cir., 234 F.2d 650, 653; Schroeder Bros., Inc. v. The Saturnia, 2 Cir., 226 F.2d 147, 149; Union Carbide & Carbon Corp. v. United States, 2 Cir., 200 F.2d 908, 910. And we find each of them supported by ample evidence.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
263 F.2d 323, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/armour-company-libelant-appellee-v-compania-argentina-de-navegacion-ca2-1959.