Fort Gary Flour Mills Co. v. Steamship Belgium Maru

S.D. New York

Fort Gary Flour Mills Co. v. Steamship Belgium Maru

63 F. Supp. 892, 1935 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1005

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided March 7, 1935·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

HULBERT, District Judge.

The exceptive allegations will be held proper to effectively dispose of the issues raised. I have given careful thought to the opinion of Foster, C. J., in The Scantic, 5 Cir., 40 F.2d 39, 1930 A.M.C. 899, but the reasoning in California-Atlantic Steamship Co. v. Central Door & Lumber Co., 9 Cir., 206 F. 5, and Judge Inch in El Oriente, D. C., 5 F.2d 251, is more persuasive.

Exceptions will be sustained and an order may be entered severing the action and dismissing the libel as against the Pennsylvania Railroad Company.

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

HULBERT, District Judge.

The exceptive allegations will be held proper to effectively dispose of the issues raised. I have given careful thought to the opinion of Foster, C. J., in The Scantic, 5 Cir., 40 F.2d 39, 1930 A.M.C. 899, but the reasoning in California-Atlantic Steamship Co. v. Central Door & Lumber Co., 9 Cir., 206 F. 5, and Judge Inch in El Oriente, D. C., 5 F.2d 251, is more persuasive.

Exceptions will be sustained and an order may be entered severing the action and dismissing the libel as against the Pennsylvania Railroad Company.

Fort Gary Flour Mills Co. v. Steamship Belgium Maru, 63 F. Supp. 892, 1935 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1005 (S.D.N.Y. 1935).

Pincite

63 F. Supp. 892 (Fort Gary Flour Mills Co. v. Steamship Belgium Maru) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related