Canal Steel Works, Inc. v. One Drag Line Dredge

Fifth Circuit

Canal Steel Works, Inc. v. One Drag Line Dredge

48 F.2d 212, 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 4222, 1931 A.M.C. 1053

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 2, 1931

Docket6053

StatusPublished

Cited by23 cases

This text of 48 F.2d 212 (Canal Steel Works, Inc. v. One Drag Line Dredge) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Canal Steel Works, Inc. v. One Drag Line Dredge, 48 F.2d 212, 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 4222, 1931 A.M.C. 1053 (5th Cir. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

*213 FOSTER, Circuit Judge.

Appellant filed a libel in rem against a dredge, asserting a lien for repairs. Admiralty process issued, and the dredge was seized and taken into custody by the marshal. The District 'Court determined that the dredge was not a vessel engaged in a maritime venture when the debt was incurred, and dismissed the libel for want of jurisdiction in admiralty. The dredge was neither released on bond nor sold, and remained in the custody of the court until the libel was dismissed. Appellant appealed, but did not sue out a supersedeas, and gave bond only for costs. Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the case is moot.

We need not consider the merits. By the failure of appellant to obtain a supersedeas, the seizure was released, and there is now no subject-matter upon which the judgment of this court could operate and give relief to appellant. The ease has become moot. Heitmuller v. Stokes, 256 U. S. 359, 41 S. Ct 522, 65 L. Ed. 990; Brownlow v. Schwartz, 261 U. S. 216, 43 S. Ct. 263, 67 L. Ed. 620; Norwegian Co. v. Tariff Com., 274 U. S. 106, 47 S. Ct. 499, 71 L. Ed. 949; U. S. v. Anchor Coal Co., 279 U. S. 812, 49 S. Ct. 262, 73 L. Ed. 971. Case dismissed; appellant to pay costs.

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

*213 FOSTER, Circuit Judge.

Appellant filed a libel in rem against a dredge, asserting a lien for repairs. Admiralty process issued, and the dredge was seized and taken into custody by the marshal. The District 'Court determined that the dredge was not a vessel engaged in a maritime venture when the debt was incurred, and dismissed the libel for want of jurisdiction in admiralty. The dredge was neither released on bond nor sold, and remained in the custody of the court until the libel was dismissed. Appellant appealed, but did not sue out a supersedeas, and gave bond only for costs. Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that the case is moot.

We need not consider the merits. By the failure of appellant to obtain a supersedeas, the seizure was released, and there is now no subject-matter upon which the judgment of this court could operate and give relief to appellant. The ease has become moot. Heitmuller v. Stokes, 256 U. S. 359, 41 S. Ct 522, 65 L. Ed. 990; Brownlow v. Schwartz, 261 U. S. 216, 43 S. Ct. 263, 67 L. Ed. 620; Norwegian Co. v. Tariff Com., 274 U. S. 106, 47 S. Ct. 499, 71 L. Ed. 949; U. S. v. Anchor Coal Co., 279 U. S. 812, 49 S. Ct. 262, 73 L. Ed. 971. Case dismissed; appellant to pay costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 F.2d 212, 1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 4222, 1931 A.M.C. 1053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/canal-steel-works-inc-v-one-drag-line-dredge-ca5-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack