Harris v. The Prometheus

D. New York

Harris v. The Prometheus

11 F. Cas. 643

DecidedJuly 1, 1837

StatusPublished

This text of 11 F. Cas. 643 (Harris v. The Prometheus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Harris v. The Prometheus, 11 F. Cas. 643 (nyd 1837).

Pincite

Opinion

HELD BY

THE COURT:

That the rule in such cases is that the libelant recover for the use of his vessel during the time necessary to make the repairs; and by the use of the vessel is meant what she would produce for chartering her in the business in which she had been usually employed. That if, after the necessary repairs are made, the vessel is further detained and kept from her business, either by storms or other state of the weather, by ice or other obstructions in the harbor or river where she may be, or from any other cause not directly produced by the collision, for such further detention there can be no recovery. That from the evidence in this case it does not appear what number of days was necessary for the repairs. That if the amount allowed per day was -what the vessel was worth with a full crew on board, then that amount is too large.

Referred back to commissioner for an additional report.

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

HELD BY

THE COURT:

That the rule in such cases is that the libelant recover for the use of his vessel during the time necessary to make the repairs; and by the use of the vessel is meant what she would produce for chartering her in the business in which she had been usually employed. That if, after the necessary repairs are made, the vessel is further detained and kept from her business, either by storms or other state of the weather, by ice or other obstructions in the harbor or river where she may be, or from any other cause not directly produced by the collision, for such further detention there can be no recovery. That from the evidence in this case it does not appear what number of days was necessary for the repairs. That if the amount allowed per day was -what the vessel was worth with a full crew on board, then that amount is too large.

Referred back to commissioner for an additional report.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 F. Cas. 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-the-prometheus-nyd-1837.