Goumas v. K. Karras & Son
140 F.2d 157, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3893, 1944 A.M.C. 60
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided January 26, 1944·No. No. 221·Published·Cited by 7 cases
Opinion
We agree with what was said in the excellent opinion of the court below as, to the lack of admiralty jurisdiction here. There is no jurisdiction in admiralty except of a maritime contract, and the contract here was not of that character.1 The same considerations apply if the libel be regarded as stating a tort claim: It is not a maritime tort.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Goumas v. K. Karras & Son, 140 F.2d 157, 1944 U.S. App. LEXIS 3893, 1944 A.M.C. 60 (2d Cir. 1944).
140 F.2d 157 (Goumas v. K. Karras & Son) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Garanti Finansal Kiralama A.S. v. Aqua Marine and Trading Inc.
697 F.3d 59 (Second Circuit, 2012)
Peralta Shipping Corporation v. Smith & Johnson (Shipping) Corp.
739 F.2d 798 (Second Circuit, 1984)
Brown v. Motor Vessel "Numero Uno"
20 V.I. 368 (Virgin Islands, 1983)
Bergen Shipping Co., Ltd. v. Japan Marine Serv., Ltd.
386 F. Supp. 430 (S.D. New York, 1974)
T. Smith & Son, Inc. v. Rigby
305 F. Supp. 418 (E.D. Louisiana, 1969)
P. D. Marchessini & Co., (NEW YORK) Inc. v. Pacific Marine Corp.
227 F. Supp. 17 (S.D. New York, 1964)
Miravalles Compania Naviera, S. S. v. Nissho Co., Ltd., Tokyo
207 F. Supp. 716 (E.D. New York, 1962)