Frank & Hirsch Distributing Co. v. United States

76 F. Supp. 501
District Court, S.D. New York·Decided November 28, 1947·Published

Opinion

COXE, District Judge.

The respondent’s exceptions to the libel are sustained. Under Sec. 2 of the Suits in Admiralty Act, 46 U.S.C.A. § 742, suit against the United States must be brought in the District Court for the District “in which the parties so suing, or any of them, reside or have their principal place of business in the United States, or in which the vessel or cargo charged with liability is found.” The libel contains no allegations to satisfy these requirements, and is fatally defective in that respect. Barnes v. United States, D.C., 67 F.Supp. 571; Sawyer v. United States, D.C., 66 F.Supp. 271; Abbott v. United States, D.C., 61 F. Supp. 989; Carroll v. United States, 2 Cir., 133 F.2d 690. But see McGhee v. United States, 2 Cir., 154 F.2d 101. It can make no difference whether the requirements of the statute are jurisdictional or merely venue provisions, as in either case the exceptions to the libel are good.

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

Frank & Hirsch Distributing Co. v. United States, 76 F. Supp. 501 (S.D.N.Y. 1947).

76 F. Supp. 501 (Frank & Hirsch Distributing Co. v. United States) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McGhee v. United States
154 F.2d 101 (Second Circuit, 1946)
Carroll v. United States
133 F.2d 690 (Second Circuit, 1943)
Sawyer v. United States
66 F. Supp. 271 (S.D. New York, 1946)
Abbott v. United States
61 F. Supp. 989 (S.D. New York, 1945)
Barnes v. United States
67 F. Supp. 571 (S.D. New York, 1946)