Barron v. Locke

U.S. District Court

Barron v. Locke

2 F. Cas. 937

DecidedJuly 1, 1864

StatusPublished

This text of 2 F. Cas. 937 (Barron v. Locke) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States District Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Barron v. Locke, 2 F. Cas. 937 (usdistct 1864).

Pincite

Opinion

The defense is that the seaman is not entitled to the small balance claimed, because he had not been discharged from the vessel, and that leaving without being discharged forfeited the wages due. On the other hand, it was in evidence that tbs seaman was sick, and'unable to be on board ship. It would be hard and unjust, the court contended, to hold him to a literal performance. His sickness is an excuse, and therefore the balance of wages must be decreed, with costs.

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

The defense is that the seaman is not entitled to the small balance claimed, because he had not been discharged from the vessel, and that leaving without being discharged forfeited the wages due. On the other hand, it was in evidence that tbs seaman was sick, and'unable to be on board ship. It would be hard and unjust, the court contended, to hold him to a literal performance. His sickness is an excuse, and therefore the balance of wages must be decreed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 F. Cas. 937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barron-v-locke-usdistct-1864.