Aspinwall v. Bartlet

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Aspinwall v. Bartlet

8 Mass. 483

CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

DecidedMarch 15, 1812

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 8 Mass. 483 (Aspinwall v. Bartlet) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aspinwall v. Bartlet, 8 Mass. 483 (Mass. 1812).

Pincite

Opinion

* By the Court.

It is generally true that a mariner has a threefold remedy for the recovery of his wages, the vessel, the owners, and the master. But where, as in the case before us, there was an absolute contract to sell, and possession delivered pursuant to that contract, and a part of the agreement was, that the new employers of the vessel should victual and man her for the voyage, such employer is in place of the owner, and is liable for the wages of the seamen. The former owner cannot be also held,

Judgment on the"verdict.

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

* By the Court.

It is generally true that a mariner has a threefold remedy for the recovery of his wages, the vessel, the owners, and the master. But where, as in the case before us, there was an absolute contract to sell, and possession delivered pursuant to that contract, and a part of the agreement was, that the new employers of the vessel should victual and man her for the voyage, such employer is in place of the owner, and is liable for the wages of the seamen. The former owner cannot be also held,

Judgment on the"verdict.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 Mass. 483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aspinwall-v-bartlet-mass-1812.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack